Early Modern Ottoman Coffeehouse Culture and The Formation of The Consumer Subject

Copyright Journal of Consumer Research 2010 1
Preprint (not copyedited or formatted)

Please use DOI when citing or quoting
Early Modern Ottoman Coffeehouse Culture and the

Formation of the Consumer Subject
EMİNEGÜL KARABABA
GÜLİZ GER
Eminegül Karababa (e.karababa@exeter.ac.uk) is lecturer in marketing, University of Exeter,

Exeter, EX4 4PU, UK. Güliz Ger (ger@bilkent.edu.tr) is professor of marketing, Bilkent
University, Ankara, 06800, Turkey. The authors would like to thank Halil İnalcık and
Mehmet Kalpaklı for sharing their invaluable knowledge and sources and Jonathan Schroeder
for his useful comments on earlier versions of this article. The authors are grateful for the
supportive and helpful remarks and insights provided by the editor, associate editor, and the
reviewers, particularly the trainee reviewer.
Abstract
We examine the socio-historical formation of the consumer subject during the development
of consumer culture in the context of leisure consumption. Specifically, we investigate how
an active consumer was forming while a coffeehouse culture was taking shape during early
modern Ottoman society. Utilizing multiple historical data sources and analysis techniques,
we focus on the discursive negotiations and the practices of the consumers, marketers, the
state, and the religious institution as relevant stakeholders. Our findings demonstrate that
multiparty resistance, enacted by consumers and marketers, first challenged the authority of
the state and religion and then changed them. Simultaneously and at interplay with various
institutional transformations, a public sphere, a coffeehouse culture, and a consumer subject
constructing his self-ethics were developed, normalized, and legalized. We discuss the
implications of the centrality of transgressive hedonism in this process as well as the
existence of an active consumer in an early modern context.
Pleasure and leisure are two important characteristics of today’s consumer culture
(Belk, Ger, and Askegaard 2003; Goulding et al. 2009; Hirschman and Holbrook 1982;
Kozinets et al. 2004; Urry 2000). Masses of consumers enjoy leisure away from home and
work in “third places” such as cafés (Kjeldgaard and Ostberg 2007; Oldenburg 1999;
Thompson and Arsel 2004). Today we are surrounded by many cafés in various styles. Some
are global-branded like Starbucks (Ritzer 2007). Some are local, defined either by anti-
corporate discourses (Thompson and Arsel 2004) or by hybridization of multiple local
traditional and global forms (Kjeldgaard and Ostberg 2007). Today’s café culture has
materialized with certain continuities and ruptures from its origins. Kjeldgaard and Ostberg
challenge the global-local dichotomy and argue that neither global nor local coffee shops are
authentic but rather are both globally and socio-historically formed, stemming from 17th-
century European coffeehouses. The earliest form of the coffeehouse emerged in the mid-16th
century Ottoman Empire and spread to the world in the next century. We investigate the
socio-historical construction of the initial form of this sphere and its consumers.
The coffeehouse, being a site of pleasurable leisure linked to both the birth of
consumer culture and the less frivolous public sphere, is a significant entity.
Commercialization and democratization of leisure—in coffeehouses, theatres, art galleries,
concert halls, and gardens—in 18th-century England is one of the markers of the development
of consumer culture (Plumb 1982). Similarly, the increased popularity of the Ottoman
coffeehouse in the 16th and 17th centuries, revealing its commercialization and
democratization, indicates an Ottoman consumer culture. It seems that the British
coffeehouse, deemed to have founded the 17th-century public sphere (Habermas 1992), had
its origins in Ottoman early modernity (Kömeçoğlu 2005; MacLean 2007; Öztürk 2005). In
this study, we address the emergence of this significant site and its consumer in the
unexpected Ottoman context rather than in an early modern western context—the usual home
of modernity and modern consumer culture.
In examining today’s consumer culture, consumption studies generally portray
consumers as subjects who actively negotiate and transform market-mediated meanings to
define and express their identities and social relations (Arnould and Thompson 2005; Fırat
and Dholakia 1998; Fırat and Venkatesh 1995; Slater 1997). Researchers often attribute this
active self-definition to the transformation from a modern to a postmodern condition, where
structural divisions like class and gender lose their importance in ascribing identities, and,
instead, marketing and media make available numerous symbolic resources to the consumers
for use in constructing their identities themselves (Fırat and Venkatesh 1995; Holt 1998;
Slater 1997). Researchers have investigated the self-constituting consumer in a variety of
contemporary contexts (Brown, Kozinets, and Sherry 2003; Holt and Thompson 2004;
Kozinets et al. 2004; Maclaran and Brown 2005; Peñaloza and Gilly 1999; Thompson 2004;
Thompson and Arsel 2004; Thompson and Haytko 1997). However, as Borgerson (2005) also
argues, the theoretical underpinnings of the concept of actively self-identifying consumer
have not sufficiently been interrogated. That is, more research is needed on the
conceptualization of the consumer and the context in which such a subject is formed in order
to better understand the relationship between consumer subjects and their environments. In
this research, our goal is to (re)examine the active consumer, who has usually been assumed
to be the product of 20th-century capitalism. By going back to an early modern period, we
aim to explain how and under what conditions an active consumer subject was formed.
Scholars have linked the historical development of consumer culture to tendencies

such as circumvention of sumptuary laws; spread of consumer goods, luxury, fashion, and
leisure time activities to masses; and interactions among various consumer cultures
(Arvidsson 2003; Brewer and Porter 1993; de Vries 2008; McKendrick, Brewer, and Plumb
1982; Mukerji 1983; Roche 2000). However, this literature does not explain if and how the
consumer subject was formed during the development of consumer culture (Poster 1989).
Instead, it supposes a rather passive consuming subject (Fırat and Dholakia 1998;
McKendrick et al. 1982) shaped by numerous structural transformations. These
transformations entail the emergence of a new class, the bourgeois between the aristocracy
and peasantry (McKendrick et al. 1982; Mukerji 1983; Simmel 1957; Veblen 1899/1994), the
growth of urbanization and commercialization (Braudel 1993; Polanyi 1957; Roche 2000;
Schama 1987), the formation of new ethics (Campbell 1987; Mukerji 1983), the changes in
the economic policies of the state from mercantilism toward liberalism (McKendrick 1982;
Mukerji 1983), and the new role taken on by the market, supplementing, for example,
religion and state, in determining received reality and truth (Agnew 1993; Slater 1997).
Albeit such structural changes, we wonder, if consumer culture was in the forming, should
not the active consumer also be in the forming. So, we examine if and how a consumer
subject was constructed during the development of a consumer culture and if and how the
consumer interacted with structural formations. Interrogating the supposed unidirectional link
from structure to consumer, we focus on the Ottoman coffeehouse consumer. We address the
following question: How did early modern people, supposedly tied to prescriptions, move
from such prescribed manners of consumption to negotiated and at least partially self-
determined modes?
We focus on the 16th- and 17th-century Ottoman era since this was the place and time
of the emergence of the coffeehouse, which then spread to Europe. Upon its popularity, first
in Istanbul and then elsewhere in the empire, Mediterranean merchants introduced coffee to
Europe (de Lemps 1999) through the ports of Venice, Marseille, London, and Amsterdam
(Schievelbusch 2000). Coffee reached Venice in 1615 (Braudel 1992). The first coffee shop
was opened in London in 1652, followed by many others (Wills 1993). In France, in 1672,
coffee was marketed with exotic Turkish images at stalls decorated with tapestries, mirrors,
chandeliers, and preserved fruits (Ellis 2004). By the early 18th century, coffee was
introduced to the Netherlands (Schama 1987), proliferating further the drink and its sites of
leisure. The Ottoman Empire’s role in the world was not limited to the spread of coffee and
coffeehouses. As a then-world power, it ruled the lands and trade routes in three continents—
southeast Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa (Fisher 1971) and contributed
politically, economically, and culturally to its period, including the European renaissance
(İnalcık 1974; MacLean 2005). Consider painters like Holbein, Bellini, and Lotto’s
depictions of Turkish carpets or Mozart’s Rondo Alla Turca, inspired by the Ottoman army
band. Today, we have Dave Brubeck’s “Blue Rondo a la Turk,” Ottoman influence is still
visible in its former lands, and its much-less-powerful successor, Turkey, is among the G20.
The 16th- and 17th-century Ottoman society saw not only coffeehouses but also
transformations in broader consumption patterns (Karababa 2006; Grehan 2007) and a
decline in obedience to religious and legal prescriptions. Focusing on the coffeehouse, a
precursor of the third place, and aiming to understand the formation of an active consumer
and a coffeehouse culture, we examine the change in subjects—how they move from obeying
prescriptions to rejecting them, or, from being sultan’s subjects to consumer subjects.
We adopt an anthropological-historical approach in order to understand the formation
and social construction of an active, yet early modern, coffeehouse consumer in relation to
market institutions—in this case, guilds as well as the state and the religious authority.
Concurring with Peñaloza (2000), we examine marketplace interactions at the discursive and
practice levels. At the practice level, we focus on the transgressions of the consumers,
resistances of the guilds, enforcements of the state and the religious authority, and the
changes in the discursive practices of these actors. At the discourse level, we examine the
power struggles among countervailing discourses (Foucault 1980) to understand consumer
resistances in the form of tactics (de Certeau 1988) and the ethical constitution (Foucault,
2000) of the coffeehouse consumer. De Certeau’s theory of practice complements later
Foucault’s analysis of the structures of power in that the individual’s agency is enacted
through the utilization of alternative meaning systems in the society. At both practice and
discourse levels, and akin to Belk et al. (2003), we focus on the dialogic relationship between
the pursuit of pleasure and religious morality. We delineate how these struggles composed an
active consumer subject, the Ottoman coffeehouse culture, and a public sphere.
METHOD
Historical research necessitates much iteration among data sources and literature
throughout the research process (Smith and Lux 1993) as well as comparison and contrasting
of different sources (Jenkins 2003). Accordingly, we examined the literature on history of
consumption and the early modern Ottoman context and interviewed eminent Ottoman
historians about the topic and the data sources. We critically evaluated and compared the
literatures on history of consumption and Ottoman history, considering various disparities in
theoretical and scholarly perspectives as well as the contextual differences.
We were bound by the available data sources, as all historical researchers are (Tosh
2006). To be able to attain trustworthiness, we relied on diverse data sources and multiple
analysis techniques. We sought sources to help us identify the coffeehouse context;
discourses operating in the coffeehouse realm; practices of the consumers and the market
actors; changes in these practices; and transformations in the demographic, social, cultural,
economic, and political domains. In addition to the vast literature on Ottoman history, our
data sources include decrees, two fatwas, two festival books, a tezkire (poetry anthology),
various poems, two etiquette books, two chronicles, a morality book, various European
travelers’ notes, miniatures, engravings, and drawings (table 1)—in other words, any and all
available data. We scrutinized these sources depending on their official or non-official status.
For example, if the author or the patron of a text was from the officialdom, we expected the
text to represent or at least not oppose the official discourse. Decrees, fatwas, miniatures,
chronicles, and books on prices, etiquette, morality and festivals oftentimes reflect the official
view. One of the etiquette books is a letayif, an Ottoman genre that criticizes everyday
conduct (Çavuşoğlu 1977). The original work, likely to have been written in the 16th century,
was reproduced by different writers until the 19th century (Esir 2001). Poetry can reflect
official or non-official views depending on the author’s background. Some tezkires, such as
Aşık Çelebi’s reflects both views since it contains the author’s views about different poets,
their everyday life conducts, as well as samples from their poems. Finally, European
travelers’ notes, engravings and drawings represent outsiders’ views.
________________________
Insert table 1 about here
________________________
Most of the data sources—except travelers’ notes and visual sources—are in Ottoman
Turkish, the language of the 16th and 19th centuries in the Ottoman Empire. Ottoman Turkish
is a combination of Arabic, Persian, and Turkish vocabularies and grammars (Kurt 1996) and
is written with the Arabic script. Most of the archival texts used in this research are extracted
from sources that include copies of original texts, transcriptions in the Latin alphabet, and
textual and/or literary analyses. In some cases, we also sought literary interpretations from
cultural historians. In addition, the first author has knowledge of reading, transcribing, and
interpreting archival data sources, and expertise in the archives of 16th- and 17th-century
Ottoman probate inventories (Karababa 2006). She had attended doctoral classes on historical
research methods and Ottoman paleography and history. When presenting the data here, we
often used her translations in English and provided the page numbers in the original source.
Some Ottoman sources are in the form of prose—such as the decrees and price books,
others in verse, but most are in mixed form, such as the etiquette, tezkire, and festival books.
The popularity of poetry then is perhaps akin to that of music and video clips today. Poetry—
writing and reading—had been and still is very popular in the geography. Accordingly, it has
been used in anthropological analyses, for example in contemporary Egypt (Abu-Lughod
1999). Andrews (1985) argues that Ottoman poets sought to artfully reflect shared views and
thus Ottoman poetry is a communal art form that confirms the values, vision, and worldview
of the community. Even the “high” form, divan poetry, produced by literate people and thus
supposed to reflect the “high” culture had a broad audience (Andrews 1985). The use of a
limited vocabulary, reliance on some key terms and stable metaphors made poetry widely
accessible. Furthermore, the poets themselves did not belong to a single elite group of
scholars but had diverse backgrounds: many were bureaucrats, artisans, and janissaries
(Hamadeh 2008; Kılıç 1994). İsen’s (1989) study of the occupational backgrounds of a
sample of 3182 Ottoman poets indicates that 36% were scholars of theology, 28%
bureaucrats, 5.7% sheikhs and dervishes, 3.7% military, 3.7% artisans and merchants, 1.8%
courtiers, and 0.8% religious functionaries. Thus, these poems express shared values as well
as a broad range of lives and experiences.
Our visual data sources included miniatures, engravings, and drawings that depict
Ottoman coffeehouses from the late 16th century on. We present only one here: the miniature
in figure 1, since it provides the earliest and a highly detailed portrayal of the people and
events in a coffeehouse. Interestingly, contrary to the premise that representational imagery
was forbidden in Islamic cultures, various types of such imagery as in miniatures, puppet
theatres, figurative calligraphy, and figurative depictions on carpets, ceramics, copperware,
and walls were common and widely available to the Ottoman public (And 2004).
Throughout the analysis, we interrogated different paradigmatic stances that provided
us different levels of understanding. The first author engaged in a critical documentarist
approach to make sense of what a particular document might have meant at the time it was
produced (Carr 2001). Next, we studied the relations between consumption and demographic,
economic, and social structures in the Annales tradition (Braudel 1980) to attain a
macroscopic view. However, we do not prescribe to the Annales école assumption that
changes in socioeconomic and demographic structures determine historical transformations in
culture and human practices. Equipped with documentarist and macroscopic perspectives, we
focused on the interplay between structure and the consumer subject. Such a post-structuralist
approach (Jenkins 2003) is a recent cultural turn in the field of history and has been termed
“cultural history” (Bonnell and Hunt 1999; Darnton 2001).
While we, like Campbell (1987), examine the formation of consumer and consumer
culture, our post-structuralist perspective—as well as time periods and geographies—
distinguishes our work from his. Focusing on the 18th- and 19th-century England, he explains
how the self-identifying consumer of the Enlightenment era was shaped by the Romantic
ethic and accentuates the role of the structure—a new ethic. Instead of accepting the
consumer as a construction of a specific ethics, we examine the consumer’s role in shaping
consumer culture and institutional practices; that is, we focus on the interplay between
structural forms and consumers.
Furthermore, we conducted textual analysis, discourse analysis, and visual analysis.
We analyzed verbal and visual data critically by considering the background of the author,
the audience of the text, and the cultural context in which the text was produced (Baxandall
1988; Stern 1989). We examined how these texts are structured, the sequence of events, and
the author’s arguments, rationales, and justifications (Coffey and Atkinson 1996). In addition,
we identified systems of statements and searched for repetitions in these statements to
identify discourses (Foucault 1972/1998; Kendall and Wickham 2003). Then, we examined
the data set to find discursive constructions of the use and meaning of the space, norms, and
practices of consumers and institutions. In addition, we searched for discontinuities in
discursive practices in order to discover the formation of a new consumer subject and
institutional transformations.
While analyzing the visuals, we described, compared, and interpreted the people, the
objects, and the activities depicted (Schroeder 2006). For example, the forty-five men in the
miniature in figure 1 were analyzed according to their appearances, locations, and social
interactions. The flowers attached on their turbans represent a fashion of the era; different
clothing styles represent various occupations. Coffeehouse objects—blue-white Chinese
cups, red carpets, and popular games like chess or mankala represent the importance of
aesthetics, pleasure, and comforts. Activities like performances and gambling reveal how
leisure time was being enjoyed. The design and the use of different spaces by different types
of people are also very telling: for example, the regulars were seated in a spacious section,
close to the furnace. We also compared the visuals with textual data to help develop a
particular interpretation. For instance, despite their different social positions, the learned, the
dancers, and the dervishes interact in the coffeehouse: we see a dervish, denoted by his
yellow felt canonical cap, discussing poetry with the turbaned poetry enthusiasts.
Miniatures were usually painted by palace artists as book illustrations or as single
depictions, which were collected in albums (And 2004). They depicted special events as well
as everyday lives. Depiction of everyday life was one of the novel styles becoming popular
during the era and used by “bazaar painters” too (And 2004). We compared Ottoman
miniatures, representing perhaps an insider’s view (Erzen 2002) with western travelers’
engravings and drawings of coffeehouses. At the simplest, the placement of the fountains at
the vanishing point, which, in engravings, is regarded to represent the gaze of the artist or the
audience (Panofsky 1993), signals the salience of alfresco enjoyment for the western gaze.
Thus, we examined data sources critically, comparatively, and iteratively and engaged
in repeated discussions with eminent historians, until the following account crystallized.
We present our findings in four sections. First, we demonstrate the presence of the
early modern Ottoman consumer culture. Next, we provide an account of the coffeehouse
culture, along with hedonistic, playful, and rebellious consumer practices. We propose that
coffeehouse discussions, satirical performances, and humorous criticisms contributed to the
formation of an early modern public sphere. The third section portrays the four discourses
which frame coffeehouse culture and consumption. Finally, we explicate the formation of the
coffeehouse culture and the consumer subject, embedded in this early modern Ottoman
consumer culture, its coffeehouse culture, and its discourses.
OTTOMAN CONSUMER CULTURE: 16th and 17th CENTURIES
Ottoman consumption patterns changed during the 16th and 17th centuries (Grehan
2007; Karababa 2006). This era was marked by significant discontinuity (Faroqhi 1997a;
İnalcık 1977): urbanization and commercialization picked up speed (Fletcher 1985; Pamuk
1999); upward and downward mobility increased (Kunt 1983); an urban popular culture
emerged (Kafadar 1994); and disparities in religious norms, which defined appropriate ways
of consumption surfaced (Karababa 2006). Ottoman codes, laws, and legal institutions aimed
to attain obedience and justice, the two ideals of this centralized power. Justice—ruling in
such a way to protect the sultan’s subjects from the exploitation of the representatives of the
authority and from illegal taxation—was deemed necessary to maintain obedience (İnalcık
1973). However, this era was also a time when the extreme authority of the interventionist
Ottoman state on production (İnalcık 1969, 1973) and consumption (Zilfi 2004) began to
yield, along with such underlying ideals.
During the 16th and 17th centuries, while pleasures of consumption were being
available to the newly rich middling ranks in the West (Berry 1994; Brewer and Porter 1993;
McKendrick et al. 1982; Mukerji 1983; Plumb 1982; Roche 2000; Schama 1987; Slater
1997), the joy of consuming comforts, novelties, luxuries, and leisure-time pursuits enlivened
the everyday life of the Ottoman urbanite (Karababa 2006). Similar to its Western
counterparts, the early modern origins of Ottoman consumer culture are marked by the
circumvention of sumptuary laws; increase in the amount of possessions and purchases;
interest in comforts rather than just necessities; spread of consumer goods including luxury,
populuxe, fashion, and leisure time activities to the masses; and interactions among various
consumer cultures.
The Class Structure and Sumptuary Laws
The Ottoman society was composed of two main classes: the ruling and the ruled. The
ruling class worked for the state as administrators, bureaucrats, armed forces (janissaries),
and professors at theological schools and was exempt from taxes. The ruled class included
merchants, artisans, and the peasantry. However, as the class structure became more fluid
during this period, the boundaries between the ruling and the ruled blurred (Faroqhi 1997a;
İnalcık 1988; Kunt 1983; Pamuk 1999). Social status was not defined by family lineage and
thus the ruling class was open to penetration from the lower echelons. For example, many
peasants attained education and then official posts (Faroqhi 1997a; İnalcık 1988) or the
children of the Christians in the Balkans, converted to Islam, were educated and later hired
for positions such as janissaries or bureaucrats (Goffman 2004; Thévenot 1978). In addition
to upward mobility, certain state practices sometimes led to downward intergenerational
mobility: occasional confiscation of wealth, aimed at maintaining social order, prevented
steady and full transfer of economic capital between generations (İnalcık 1969, 1997).
Moreover, people undertook occupations across classes. For example, janissaries and high-
level bureaucrats became merchants and used their political muscle to compete with the
guilds (Kunt 1983). Such transitions created an urban sphere where people from diverse
backgrounds met. Fluid lifetime trajectories, intergenerational mobility, and migration
diminished the security of social positions: ascribed identities could no longer persist.
Given this fluid context, the state issued sumptuary laws to maintain social and
economic order, prevent sinful conduct, and avoid waste (Quataert 1997; Zilfi 2004), akin to
the ethical, social, and economic rationales of sumptuary laws in the West (Belk 1995). Rules
regarding types of clothing and accessories attempted to distinguish different status positions,
genders and religions: for example, only high officials could wear certain types of silk (Şeker
1997) and yellow and black shoes were for Muslim and non-Muslim women, respectively
(Gürtuna 1999). Islamic law prohibited drinking wine and men’s consumption of gold objects
(Altınay 1988; Düzdağ 1998). Sumptuary laws could also prohibit women from patronizing
places where they might interact with men: for example, 16th-century decrees forbade women
from going to cream shops and taking pleasure boats on the Bosphorus (Altınay 1988).
Finally, the on-and-off-prohibition of coffeehouses, which we discuss below, was among
these sumptuary laws. Coffeehouse consumption was declared to be wasteful and spending
time with pleasurable activities to be contrary to the Islamic work-ethic (Hattox 1996).
By the 16th century, such sumptuary laws were frequently circumvented (Abou-El-Haj
2005; İnalcık 1973; Zilfi 2004) as they also were in the West during the formation of the
Western consumer culture (Belk 1995). Belk argues that evasion of sumptuary laws indicates
a widespread use of consumer goods. Accordingly, a 17th-century Ottoman scholar, Koçu
Bey, complained about the peasantry wearing the clothing and accessories, such as precious
weaponry, formerly symbolic of elite status (Abou-El-Haj 2005). Similarly, şib and diba, two
very precious fabrics, which deemed suitable only for sultans and their sons by the period’s
etiquette books, did not appear at all in the 16th-century Bursa probate records but surfaced in
the 17th-century ones (Karababa 2006). The consumers were not alone in circumventing laws:
the producers thwarted the strict legislation on production standards and began to produce
new styles and cheaper versions of luxury goods (İnalcık 1973). These populuxe goods
appear to have served the consumers who either were not allowed or could not afford to use
luxury goods and thus expanded consumption to a broadened population.
While sumptuary laws were not always implemented, etiquette books attempted to
establish proper manners of consumption, especially regarding leisure activities such as
eating, drinking, and socializing (Şeker 1997). In the Ottoman society, it was perhaps through
shaping taste, rather than solely enforcing laws that social class distinctions were attempted to
be upheld, akin to 16th- and 17th-century China (Bourdieu 1989; Clunas 2004). Regardless of,
or perhaps due to the legal and etiquette rules, consumption of populuxe goods prevailed.
Increase in Possessions, Purchases, and in the Interest in Comfort
Increases in the extent of acquisitions perhaps provide a more direct evidence of the
spread of consumption in urban areas. A study of consumption in Bursa demonstrates that not
only the ruling class but also the ruled class members acquired greater numbers of consumer
items in the mid-17th century than in the 16th century (Karababa 2006). For example, 17th-
century women owned statistically significantly more objects: headwear (çenber, arakiye),
underwear (don and gönlek, zıbun), robes, outerwear, and belts than the 16th-century women.
Men as well as women owned more garments at this time (Karababa 2006). Similarly, there
was a statistically significant increase in the numbers of home possessions—home furnishing
and textiles—per individual over the period. Such expansion was observed for bed sheets,
quilts, pillows, floor coverings (kilim, keçe, döşeme), curtains, wrappers, towels, and chests.
Increases in the numbers of possessions were not limited to the elite: individuals from the
ruled class also owned more items in the 17th than the 16th century (Karababa 2006).
Furthermore, compared to what they produced at home, Ottoman urbanites purchased more
items in the marketplace during the period. For example, during the 16th and 17th centuries, in
cities like Bursa and Istanbul, there were many shops selling home-textiles, clothing, and
ready-made foods like kebab, cream, desserts, and pastries (Altınay 1988; Faroqhi 1997b;
Kütükoğlu 1983). Similarly, as we discuss below, the market provided entertainment in sites
such as coffeehouses as an alternative to home-made amusements.
The increase in the acquisition of home furnishings and textiles paralleled the changes
in the size and design of Ottoman houses. Eldem (1984a; 1984b) investigated the
architectural development of Ottoman houses over time and found significant changes during
the 17th century. At this time, the urban houses were expanded by incorporating additional
spaces such as enclosing open porches with windows. Eldem (1984a) also finds that such
redesign added comfort in terms of ease of heating and maintenance. Both the expansion of
the indoor living space and the improved climate control and protection connote a rising
concern for comfort. Furthermore, the above-mentioned increases in furnishings such as
pillows, quilts, and floor coverings also imply a heightened interest in comfort.
Widespread Consumption of Fashion, Luxury, and Leisure Time Pleasures
Seventeenth century saw the sudden appearance of novel styles of clothing—such as

loose trousers and tight jackets, gold or silver accessories, and hair ornaments (Karababa
2006). Analysis of the Bursa probate records reveals that such novel items became available
to the members of the ruled as well as the ruling classes. Emergence of novelties and items of
adornment indicate the advent of fashion; adoption of these items by people of both classes
signifies the popularity of this fashion consumption. The observed spread of fashionable
consumer goods throughout the society is consistent with the fluid social structure that
allowed mobility among strata and interaction of people from different ranks.
One item of luxury that seems to have been a rage is ornamented kuşaks (belts),
woven of pure silk thread (ibrişim) or gold or silver threads. It must have been used so widely
and sumptuously that a religious declaration, fatwa eventually pronounced the
inappropriateness of kuşaks for the public and even for high officials (Düzdağ 1998). Bursa
probate records reveal that people obeyed the religious rules and that wasteful, luxurious
kuşaks were not consumed during the 16th century (Karababa 2006). However, a century
later, according to the same database, 64% of the ruling and 46% of the ruled class women
possessed silver-threaded kuşaks. Moreover, some ruling class women had kuşaks decorated
further with gold or precious jewels. This extravagance was not limited to the ruling class but
surfaced in the probate records of a subset of the ruled class as well: the urban women.
Another example of the spread of fashions and luxury was the flourishing
consumption of flowers and floral motifs on decorative objects and textiles. Flowers were
used in home, garden, and personal decoration as seen on the turbans in figure 1. Expanding
“transcultural commodity” networks linking Asian and European consumer cultures enabled
Ottoman consumers to buy luxurious imported flowers and thus enjoy a fashionable aesthetic
pleasure (Salzman 2000). Specific flowers and floral motifs became fashionable and were
represented in a diverse array of media including ceramic tiles, carpets, porcelains,
embroideries, and gilding (Taylor 1993). For example, tulips entered the scene during the late
16th century and replaced carnations and roses, the popular flowers and motifs of the earlier
years (Ayvazoğlu 1992; Salzman 2000). Tulips, like coffeehouses, later spread to Europe.
Moreover, the early modern Ottoman society saw the advent of cheaper versions of
luxury goods, which also played a role in the formation of the Western consumer culture
(Fairchilds 1993). A European traveler wrote that except for the very poor, it was not possible
to find an Ottoman woman who did not possess silk clothing (Schweigger 2004). The state
issued a price book listing approximately 260 different kinds of fabrics of which 128 were
various types of silks (Kütükoğlu 1983). Hence, consumers must have had a wide range of
choices among 128 different varieties and prices of silks. Both luxury fabrics and their
cheaper varieties were available in the market for use in clothing and home furnishings.
Finally, leisure time activities were also democratized and commercialized. Sites of
leisure included bathhouses, taverns, boza (a fermented wheat drink) shops, cream shops,
gardens, and coffeehouses, all of which became popular during the period (Altınay 1988;
Karababa 2006). Whereas the most popular site of leisure was the coffeehouse for men, it
was the bathhouse for women. European travelers of the era noted that Ottoman middle-class
women went to public baths up to four times a week, and sometimes spent the whole day
there grooming, socializing, feasting, and entertaining (And 1993). Overall, increased
commercialization, across borders, provided opportunity for consumption for the masses and
moved the site of production of goods or entertainment from the home to the market.
Interactions with Other Early Modern Consumer Cultures
Batchelor (2006) argues that international trade of fashion goods such as Chinese
porcelains created similar types of consumers across different early modern societies. As the
16th- and 17th-century Ottoman Empire controlled a significant part of the global commodity
networks (Faroqhi 2007), many consumption items and tastes were imported and exported.
Porcelain was one of those: the Portuguese traded porcelains from China to Ottoman lands
(Kütükoğlu 1983). In the 17th century, Ottomans also produced porcelain locally. The
decorations of these local porcelains entailed a mixture of Chinese, Persian, and Islamic
motifs (Carswell 1998). This demonstrates that, like in today’s global world, interactions
among early modern societies created hybrid forms and tastes for such forms.
Imports, at a variety of quality and price levels, and the pursuant local production of
highly demanded imports made exotic luxury and populuxe available to a wide range of
consumers. Ottomans imported Venetian fabrics and glassware, woolen kerseys from London
and Carcassone (and their Dutch imitations), silk fabrics from Florence, Venice, and France,
cotton clothes from India (and their Iranian imitations), and Iranian carpets (Faroqhi 2007).
One such item, kemha (a kind of silk brocade) became exceedingly popular in the 16th
century (Dalsar 1960). By the 17th century, various versions of kemha were being imported.
To exploit this new generation of kemhas and compete against their foreign counterparts,
Bursian weavers replicated these imported varieties. So, the domestic kemha trade also
flourished. The enormous variety of fabrics imported to the Ottoman market lead to changes
in consumer tastes in a manner which producers found impossible to control (Faroqhi 2002).
Certain Ottoman ports and trade cities were active hubs in the 16th- and 17th-century
trade and played a key role in the spread of goods from the East to the West (Faroqhi 1997a;
İnalcık 1997). In the 17th century, indigo, perfume bottles, drugs, and shawls from Lahore as
well as Ottoman cotton were sold to central Europe (Faroqhi 2007). Ottoman and Asian
goods—such as spices, indigo, raw silk and cotton, yarns, fabrics, quilts, carpets, drugs,
currants, and oil—spread throughout the English middle-class families by emulation and
entrepreneurial activity as well as trade (MacLean 2007). The Ottoman coffeehouse was
among the things that traveled to early modern Europe (Ellis 2004). It has since been
reconstructed in various cultures and become a global leisure site.
OTTOMAN COFFEEHOUSE CULTURE IN THE 16TH AND 17TH CENTURIES

While its earliest examples appear in the records of Mecca and Cairo in the 1510s, the
coffeehouse became popular after the Ottoman conquest of Arab lands; in particular, after
two entrepreneurs from Aleppo and Damascus launched two coffeehouses in Istanbul in early
1550s (Cohen 2004; Hattox 1996). Soon, coffeehouses spread all over Istanbul and even to
small towns in Anatolia (Arendonk 2009; Faroqhi 1986). With urbanization (Erder and
Faroqhi 1980) and commercialization (Pamuk 1999), they formed alternative sites for
Ottoman Muslim men, who formerly spent most of their time in prescribed spaces such as
work, mosque, and home.
Coffeehouse as a “Fourth Place”
The Ottoman coffeehouse resembles today’s cafés and neighborhood pubs in enabling
individuals to interact with others and enjoy time away from their responsibilities (Oldenburg
1999). This location shares certain characteristics with contemporary “third places:” a neutral
meeting ground and social leveling, the presence of the regulars, and a site of socialization
and various pleasures. It provided a “fourth place” in contrast to work, home, and mosque or
Sufi lodges. In the early modern period, mosques, Sufi lodges, and perhaps even churches
shared most of the above third place characteristics with probably some pleasurable activities
too, at the least, enjoyable interaction with others.
Ottoman coffeehouse consumption was a ritualistic pursuit of leisure with specific
artifacts, particular participant roles, an informal script, and an audience (Rook 1985). In
addition to coffee itself, poems, books, and musical instruments, games like backgammon
and chess, and utensils like coffee grinders, ewers, trays, and porcelain cups, were objects
that contributed to this enjoyable activity. Carpets, the furnace, and the carved niches on the
walls displaying porcelain cups provided the decor. Coffee makers, servants, performers,
storytellers, and consumers all had specific qualities and roles. Servants were expected to be
young, beautiful, sexually appealing, and well dressed (Hattox 1996). Coffee makers
prepared coffee with precise instructions, exact timing, and specific mixes of ingredients.
Performers danced and played music. As with many other sites of leisure—such as Chinese
teahouses or Ottoman bathhouses—the coffeehouse staged basic human practices and
routines of daily life such as eating and drinking. And, the audience, the consumers enjoyed
the pleasures the coffeehouse staged.
________________________
Insert figure 1 about here
________________________
Ottoman coffeehouses were designed in such a way that regulars oftentimes were
seated on a platform at the corner, next to the furnace, reached by two narrow fenced
staircases, similar to the ones in mosques (Ünver 1963). Regulars sitting on a higher
platform, separated from the rest of the customers are seen at the top right corner of figure 1.
The regulars were mostly the coffee addicts and the elderly with high social rank; the
youngsters, especially those making too much noise or engaging in “inappropriate”
behaviors, were not allowed to sit with them (Ünver 1963). Oldenburg (1999) suggests that
the regulars were the ones who created the friendly, warm, and unique atmosphere that made
people feel at home.
The 16th- and 17th-century coffeehouse was a “leveler,” allowing people from
different ranks to meet (Oldenburg 1999) akin to the early 20th-century teahouses in China
(Wang 2000). The French traveler Thévenot (1978) observed that everyone went to
coffeehouses without facing discrimination based on occupation, religion, or status.

Similarly, a decree issued in the 16th century informs us that men-of-letters, unemployed
officers, judges, preachers, professors, university students, dervishes, merchants, military
people, artisans, and poor and idle people all met there (Dağlıoğlu 1940). Furthermore, the
coffeehouse offered a “neutral ground” (Oldenburg 1999) for social gatherings in contrast to
the host-guest relationship at homes. Peçevi’s chronicle notes that, at least the men-of-letters
preferred the easier and cheaper coffeehouses over homes as meeting places (Baykal 1981).
Rather than merely providing a place to drink coffee, the coffeehouse created a
pleasant site for patrons to interact in. It provided sociopleasure—enjoyment people share
when they get together (Tiger 2005) to Ottoman urbanites, more of whom were becoming
alienated from their roots and original communities with growing urbanization. Coffeehouse
consumers enjoyed chatting, sharing news and rumors about the administration, and literary
conversations where writers submitted their latest compositions for assessment (Baykal 1981;
Hattox 1996; Şeker 1997). A 17th-century poem demonstrates this ultimate goal of
sociopleasure (Kafadar 2007, 120):
The heart fancies neither coffee nor coffeehouse
The heart fancies companionship [or conversation], coffee is an excuse.
Companionship and socializing in the coffeehouse entailed play with autotelic and
interpersonal actions (Holt 1995; Oldenburg 1999) like joking, teasing, laughing, performing
to friends during conversations, and other entertaining activities that took place (Hattox 1996;
Şeker 1997). Moreover, gambling and playing recreational and competitive games like chess
and backgammon were common in coffeehouses (Hattox 1996; Şeker 1997). For example, in
the lower center of the miniature in figure 1, a competitive game between two backgammon
players is depicted: one of the players has taken off his turban and his bodily movements
suggest that he is throwing the dice. Competition and gambling are additionally pleasurable
due to the enjoyable experience of one’s own performance (Arnould and Price 1993; Holt
1995) and the excitement of risk and imagining the possibility of winning (Cotte 1997).
The coffeehouse also provided physiopleasures—relaxation and refreshment—(Tiger
2005) of the drink, the (coffee) break, the atmosphere, and sometimes more. The grander
coffeehouses with carpeted floors and fine porcelain cups, provided highly comfortable,
aesthetically pleasing, and sometimes al-fresco enjoyment. Western traveler’s notes depict
coffeehouses which even had fountains inside or were located outdoors in gardens or next to
rivers, with a carpet on the ground, in various Ottoman cities (Ellis 2004; Hattox 1996). Even
though smaller coffeehouses could not match such atmospherics, they still provided
relaxation and refreshment to the masses. Moreover, 16th- and 17th-century coffeehouses were
places of entertainment where customers enjoyed listening to music or traditional romances
and folk tales from storytellers or watching dancers or shadow puppet shows (And 1975;
Bingül 2004; Hattox 1996). Figure 1 depicts a young man dancing and playing percussions at
the center of the coffeehouse. At the left side of the miniature are four accompanying
musicians, the youngest one with a cap playing the tambourine.
Moreover, coffeehouses at times accommodated illicit pleasures of frivolous sexuality
and drugs. Some of the puppet shows and songs were obscene and erotic (And 1975; Öztürk
2005). Perhaps a more significant sexual facet was the contact between the waiters and the
clients. The interactions of attractive and well-dressed young male waiters with customers
sometimes went beyond serving coffee (Ellis 2004; Hattox 1996). In figure 1, one of the men
among the group of regulars is portrayed as caressing the face of a beautiful boy who bends
towards him. The boy’s ostentatious clothing and youth suggest that he is a dancer (And
2004). Travelers and commentators remarked that, in some coffeehouses, young charming
boys displayed their skills “shamelessly” and the dancers and musicians pushed the limits of
“sinfulness,” sometimes tainting the reputation of the coffeehouse regulars (And 2004; Ellis
2004). In addition, much like the contained illegality of today’s raves (Goulding et al. 2009),
early modern Ottoman coffeehouses took in drug users seeking escape and ecstasy. A 17th-
century chronicler, Katip Çelebi, states that drug users found coffee to be a life-giving
substance that increased their pleasure (Gökyay 1980) and some drug-addicted consumers
spent hours in the coffeehouse in a mode of drowsiness (Korkmaz 2004).
Finally, in coffeehouses, Ottoman men enjoyed ideopleasures (Tiger 2005) of
mentally intensive literary or academic experiences. Figure 1 depicts a group of men in front
of the furnace with papers and pens in their hands, reading and writing while sipping their
coffees. Such men-of-letters enjoyed aesthetic pleasures of discussing poetry and religious
sciences and assessing each other’s works (Ünver 1963). Such leisurely discussions were
transferred from home and work to the coffeehouse. In Ottoman society, before the
coffeehouses were established, poetry meetings were either organized by wealthy patrons of
higher social status or by poetry enthusiasts who were not close to these circles. The latter
group regularly met at private homes, or in shops or taverns (İpekten 1996). For example,
poetry meetings took place at Zati’s shop of fortunetelling in Istanbul, at spice shops of
Nasuhi and Safahi in Edirne, and at Şeyhi’s shop that sold trousers in Bursa (İpekten 1996).
In their work environment, poets enjoyed producing and discussing their poems. Organizing
meetings at homes was costly to the host and meeting at taverns was not appropriate for
Muslims, since wine is forbidden in Koran (Şeker 1997). All such atmospherics and rituals
for poetry gatherings transferred to the coffeehouses.
Men-of-letters were not necessarily of high status. For example, in figure 1, the
inclusion of a Sufi dervish in the group is one indication that poetry discussions could be
among people of different social positions. As mentioned in the methods section, the
backgrounds of poetry enthusiasts differed significantly. For example, a janissary, Beliğ, was
also a reputable poet and a coffee aficionado, who wrote poems about coffee (Kılıç 1994). A
16th-century etiquette book, authored by a bureaucrat, identified studious coffeehouse patrons
to be incompetent poetry enthusiasts, without the refined tastes of the elite (Şeker 1997). If
the existence of amateur connoisseurs is an indicator of consumer culture (Belk 1995), the
amateur poetry enthusiasts who frequented the coffeehouses are also indicative of the
burgeoning Ottoman consumer culture. In part due to the coffeehouses, poetry was becoming
a popular art form—like today’s popular music—consumed by people from various classes.
Ottoman Coffeehouses: Revisiting the Formation of the Public Sphere
Habermas (1992) defines “public sphere” to be a discursive sphere where people from
different parts of the society get together and engage in debates about matters of mutual
interest, thus forming public opinion and, if possible, reaching a common judgment about a
debate. Thus, public sphere is where politics and society meet. Habermas suggests that the
18th-century British coffeehouse exemplifies the development of bourgeois public sphere. We
propose that, the original source of the 18th-century British coffeehouse, the Ottoman
coffeehouse served to form the Ottoman public sphere.
The Ottoman coffeehouse was a place where people of diverse social positions met
and engaged in debates. Men-of-letters, scholars or amateurs, gathered to discuss poetry
(Baykal 1981) and many others viewed and discussed theatrical performances, narrated
stories, and shadow-puppet shows (Hattox 1996). Usually, tales and plays were satires of
everyday life and the sociopolitical and economic conditions; if not, critical and reflexive
accounts of current events were incorporated into the plots of often-improvised performances
(And 1975; Öztürk 2005). Hence, coffeehouse discussions played a not-so-trivial role in
forming critical public opinion.
Moreover, coffeehouses were sites for critical action which linked political authority
and the societal demands. For example, dervishes of the Qalandriyya order—a Muslim order
influenced by Buddhist ascetics (Yazıcı 2009)—attended coffeehouses to express their
skepticism of political authorities (Barkey 1997). By the 17th century, janissaries not only
gathered and criticized the state, but actually planned riots while in the coffeehouses (Öztürk
2005). Accordingly, from the onset, the state considered coffeehouses as loci of resistance
(Ünver 1963). Such subversion is perhaps one of the key reasons behind the prohibitions of
coffeehouses (Hattox 1996).
Such critical performances and discussions point to the formation of a public sphere,
if not a Habermasian one. Habermas (1992) regards the communicative interaction among
reflexive and rational subjects as a prerequisite for the formation of the public sphere and
critical public opinion against political authority. His premise entails an Enlightenment
subject and a reflexive bourgeois class. Obviously, the early modern Ottoman coffeehouse
consumer is not such a subject. However, it is arguable whether differentiation among the
rational, aesthetic, emotional, and playful components of human communication is possible
in the first place (Kömeçoğlu 2005; Tucker 1993). If subjects can shape the public sphere by
any type of critical human communication (Tucker 1993), then satirical performances and
humorous criticisms contribute to the formation of a public sphere in the coffeehouse
(Kömeçoğlu 2005; Öztürk 2005). We advocate that critical communication, be it in the form
of rational, aesthetic, emotional, or playful criticism formed an early modern public sphere.
In the absence of an established printing press and the linked presence of illiteracy, human
communication, performances, and book readings in the coffeehouses helped create critical
public opinion among the Ottomans.
Public discussion of a diverse array of issues, spreading across the numerous
coffeehouses set the stage for individual consumer’s thoughts and acts. Archival data sources
demonstrate that coffee and coffeehouse consumption themselves became issues of debate.
We find four discourses that pertain to the coffeehouse culture during the 16th-17th centuries.
MULTIPLE DISCOURSES
The multiparty negotiations among four discourses—pleasure, Orthodox Islam, Sufi

Islam, and health—shape consumers’ coffeehouse practices as well as the practices of the
coffeehouse guilds, the state, and the religious institutions. Since individuals are moral beings
who need to justify their acts (Campbell 1987), these discourses serve as justifications and
frames as well as motivations for consumer practices.
Pleasure Discourse
As we have seen, Ottoman coffeehouses were sites of a variety of leisurely pleasures.

th
A 16 -century poet depicts the coffeehouse as a site where the craving for pleasure was
treated by providing various physiopleasures (Açıkgöz 1999, 8)
People addicted to hashish, şerbet (a sweet drink), and coffee
The coffeehouse is the hospital of the hedonist
A poem from 1583 portrays the uniqueness of this social site (Ünver 1963, 53):
The meeting place of literati, the state of pleasure
Its style is appropriate, its art is unique
Search, but it will not be possible to find anything like that

Coffeehouse has recently emerged
History, which is watching helplessly, said that

Like paradise, this is a unique place.
The poet seems to think that this novelty cannot be impeded and stresses its distinctive
ideopleasures and heavenly physiopleasures.
Coffeehouses seem to have been often represented by such paradise metaphors in the
public imagination. The paradise in Islam is the reward promised to the faithful. The Koran
describes its pleasures: rivers flowing through gardens, pleasant weather, lovely shady places,
male servants (gılmans) serving wine, wines that do not intoxicate, vessels of silver and
glasses of crystal, female servants with beautiful eyes (huris) and maidens with swelling
breasts, comfortable sofas, green silk and brocade fabrics, gold and silver bracelets, delicious
fruits, extravagant palaces, and “whatever the soul desires and in which the eyes delight”
(Kinberg 2008). Ottoman hedonism was shaped in part by such myths in the Koran. The
above poem is not the only period record of the paradise metaphor. Among others,
Gelibolu’lu Mustafa Âlî, a bureaucrat, used the paradise metaphor in his description of a
theatrical play which portrayed a coffeehouse. In Âlî’s accounts, young and fine-looking
coffeehouse waiters represented the heavenly female and male slaves (Öztekin 1996); and the
white and blue decorated porcelain cups in which coffee is served evoked the valuable
glasses in which non-intoxicating wine will be served in the utopian paradise. Moreover, as
some coffeehouses were located near rivers, in gardens, or had fountains, European travelers’
accounts and engravings of them were also reminiscent of the Koranic paradise (Hattox
1996). Ottoman coffeehouses seem to have embodied the actualization of the sacred in a
profane world (Belk, Wallendorf, and Sherry 1989); and their consumers to have experienced
a metaphorical paradise, evocative of Campbell’s (1987) imaginative hedonism.
If the coffeehouse were reminiscent of the utopian paradise in Ottoman imagination,
perhaps these consumers were purchasing the sensual pleasures of paradise in this
commercial site. This situation evokes the emergence of the therapeutic ethos, indicative of
the consumer culture in Victorian England and the late 19th-century America (Lears 1983):
the transformation from Christian morality to a new ethos created a new subject who no
longer aimed at salvation and the pleasures of heaven but instead sought pleasure in this
world. In a similar manner, instead of opting for religiously appropriate practices, the
Ottoman coffeehouse consumer sought pleasure in this worldly commercial site.
Orthodox Islam on Coffee Consumption
The pleasures of the coffeehouse were under scrutiny and intensely disputed since the
state and the aligned orthodox Islamic authority usually considered coffeehouse consumption
immoral or illegal. Excessive expenditures for the sake of pleasure and the carnal pleasures of
extramarital sexual encounters were considered sinful (Berry 1994; Tiger 2005). The
appropriateness of coffeehouse—like the contemporary khat consumption in Ethiopia and
Yemen (Anderson and Carrier 2006)—was contested from a religious perspective.
By “orthodox Islam,” we refer to the Sunnite interpretation of Islam among the 16th
th
and 17 century Ottomans. Orthodox Islam constituted the moral base of the religious and
state authorities’ interpretation of all sorts of issues ranging from the functioning of the
market to the consumption by the ideal Ottoman Muslim—the sultan’s subject—and

specifically, coffee and coffeehouse consumption. Şeyhülislam, the chief religious authority,
was employed by the state and worked in alliance with the sultan, the head of the state. While
the sultan issued decrees, şeyhülislam issued fatwas (declarations).
In this view, the sultan’s subject, an ideal Muslim, had to work hard to earn a living,
meet his family’s needs, and accumulate sufficient wealth without allowing greed to
dominate his soul (Ülgener 1981). Wealth earned was to be consumed in appropriate ways,
meeting Islamic obligations such as pilgrimage, giving zakat (providing a portion of one’s
income to those less fortunate) or sadqah (donations), meeting personal and family needs,
giving gifts, and supporting poets as poetry reflected the refined aesthetics of the period
(Öztürk 1991). Orthodox Islam prohibited philanthropy undertaken for self-promotion,
excessive pleasure-seeking, and wasteful and conspicuous consumption (Öztürk 1991; Şeker
1997). Hence, the pleasures and the leisure of the coffeehouse were viewed to be sinful.
Decrees sent to the governors of Bursa, Istanbul, and Jerusalem during the late 16th
century (Altınay 1988; Cohen 2004; Dağlıoğlu 1940), a fatwa (Düzdağ 1998), and an
etiquette book (Şeker 1997) demonstrate that coffeehouse activities were perceived to be
transgressive and contrary to orthodox Islam and its work ethic. Below we present parts from
sultan’s decree sent to the governor of Bursa in 1578 to prohibit coffeehouses. The following
is a simplified translation of the transcription of the original decree in Ottoman language:
…in my territories, it is mandatory that Islamic law has to be applied, all of the
forbidden things and things not allowed by Islamic canonical law are prohibited,
banned, and abolished. Based on this, ever since, my higher orders have been issued
repeatedly. While my highest glory, my decree has already been issued… especially
coffeehouses, the gathering place for the sinful, should be banned, everybody should
deal with his earnings and his job, and brigands should be eliminated and expelled. At
the present, people gathered with young boys, took macun (hashish), beng
(marihuana), and afyon (opium), drank wine and rakı [an alcoholic drink] with the
pretext of coffee drinking, play backgammon, chess, and doplu [a game of the
period], gamble, and spend their time with these illicit behavior and denials.
Therefore, people who had been working in their jobs are now at disgrace, university
students and assistants of judges became ignorant, rumors were spread all over the
society by the above mentioned people… (Dağlıoğlu 1940, 87)
In this decree, the sultan avowed the ban on activities against the “Islamic canonical law,”
particularly coffeehouse consumption. Ineffective in implementation, such bans were
repeated. Sensitive to the rumors regarding the negative effects of coffeehouse consumption
and circumvention of his authority, the sultan had to reissue the decree in 1578.
Similarly, and in response to an issue about coffeehouses and the kadıs (judge and
governor of an administrative district) who condoned the operation of coffeehouses, the
Şeyhülislam who served during 1545-1574 delivered the following judgment. His fatwa
declared, once again, the inappropriateness of coffeehouses (Andrews and Kalpaklı 2005,
283):
“ISSUE: If it so happens that, although his lordship, the monarch, refuge of the faith
(shadow of God on earth), has time after time [ordered] the prohibition of
coffeehouses, they are [still] not prohibited and some people of the hooligan sort, in
order to warm their gatherings, organize and set up entertainments and amusements
such as chess and backgammon, gather those of the city who are addicted to love
together with [beloveds] of pure, shining faces and evil deeds, eat electuaries of bersh
[a combination drug], opium, and hashish, and on top of this, drink coffee, occupy
themselves with the duplicitous arts, and also neglect the prescribed prayers, what is
the canonical thing to do to the kadı who is in a position to prohibit and eradicate the
aforementioned merchants and coffee drinkers?
RESPONSE: Those who engage in or abet the aforementioned unseemly [activities]
should be prohibited and restrained by [means of] severe punishment and long
imprisonment. Kadıs who go easy in their chiding [of these] must be dismissed from
their posts.”
This fatwa constructs socio, physio, and ideopleasures as sinful and pronounces that both the
consumers and the kadıs who fail to contain them should be punished.
The repeated bans, the reissued decree, and the inability of the kadıs to control illicit
coffeehouse activities all reveal that joint resistances of consumers’ and coffeehouse owners’
were effective. These consumers had at their disposal discourses other than solely orthodox
Islam. In addition to the pleasure discourse, another discourse also played a crucial role in
legitimizing pleasurable coffeehouse experiences: a different interpretation of Islam, Sufism.
Orthodox Islam was the formal but not the most dominant discourse.
Sufi Islam on Coffee Consumption
Sufism is an ascetic-mystical trend in Islam characterized by distinct values, practices,

and institutions (Knysh 2009). It has constituted a rival to orthodox Islam (Ülgener 1981).
One characteristic is dhikr which refers to the directive of the Koran to remember God and
cite his name (Chittick 2005). Sufis performed dhikr aloud, often with music, to accomplish
remembrance. During evening dhikr rituals, coffee was consumed to stay awake. The first use
of coffee for dhikr was claimed to be at Sheikh Şazeli’s order in the 13th century in Africa
(Hattox 1996). Therefore, Ottoman Sufis associated coffee drinking with this Sheikh, a holy
person who had received the grace of God.
During this period, orthodox Islam was critical toward the Sufis and their musical
prayers (Öcalan 2000). Sufism, being a post-Muhammed interpretation of Islam, as well as
other novelties associated with Sufism, such as smoking and coffee drinking, were considered
to be bid’at, “illegal innovations, according to the Islamic law” (Gerber 1988, 70). However,
Sufi orders had a significant role in Ottoman society; they were not marginal institutions.
During the 17th century, Sufi orders proliferated and spread throughout the Ottoman lands
and the numbers of followers increased (Öcalan 2000). Besides, their activities were not
restricted to the orders but rather permeated daily lives of many.
Attending Sufi orders was so common in the Ottoman society that the followers were
not distinct from the general public. Sufi leaders would preach to the public, give lectures on
Koranic sciences, teach reading and writing to the neighborhood children, have strong
interactions with the guilds, and be influential in politics (Öcalan 2000). Besides, even the
members of theological schools of orthodox Islam, the employees of the state bureaucracy, or
the people in the palace attended Sufi orders. Sufis were interested in arts, especially poetry,
and during this period in the society, Sufi poetry reached its peak (Öcalan 2000).
The connection between coffee drinking and Sufism is expressed in the poetry of the
period. Consider Nağzi’s poem which constructs coffee as sacred (Açıkgöz 1999). The poem
tells a story of the rivalry between the personified coffee and wine. In the last part of the
poem, coffee and wine go to court to give their statements to the judge. In his statement,
coffee says that his birth was based on the Prophet Mohammed. When he (coffee) was in
Ethiopia, King Solomon heard about him and brought him to Yemen. Then, coffee came to
the lodge of the famous mystical leader, Sheikh Şazeli. He underwent ascetic treatment there,
like the Sufis in their path to reach God. His covering was peeled off; he was roasted,
pounded, and boiled. Then he left Yemen and went to Mecca, Damascus, Aleppo, Cairo, and
finally arrived in Istanbul. This poem illustrates the ways Sufi images were attached to
coffee. The poet used the ascetic treatment a Sufi had to experience to reach the grace of God
in a Sufi lodge as a metaphor to explain the voyage of coffee seeds from the tree to the cup.
Moreover, by incorporating it with religious figures like Prophet Mohammed and Sheikh
Şazeli, he elevated the symbolic position of coffee and coffeehouses.
The diffusion of Sufism across the society and its informal power are likely to have
made the Sufi discourse pervasive and potent in consumer’s attempts to legitimize their
coffeehouse consumption. While pleasure and Sufi discourses provided favorable and the
orthodox Islamic view of the era unfavorable arguments, a fourth discourse provided
controversial arguments regarding the practice: debates on health served the consumers,
marketers, and the officials, either to legitimize or oppose coffee consumption.
Health Discourse
Coffee had been used as a medicine for various ailments since the 10th century
(Schievelbusch 2000). Sixteenth- and 17th-century Ottoman physicians debated its beneficial
and harmful effects. The dryness, coldness, warmness, and moistness of coffee were linked to
its harmful or beneficial effects (Açıkgöz 1999; Hattox 1996; Korkmaz 2004). For example,
the dry nature of coffee was considered harmful to people who had anxiety-related sleeping
problems; but beneficial for depressive people and women (Korkmaz 2004). One physician
named Zayni argued that coffee fostered melancholy; another, Antaki warned that it
decreased sexual activity and caused hemorrhoids and recurring headaches (Hattox 1996).
Scholars and commentators also gave contradictory council: while Katip Çelebi cautioned
drinkers about insomnia (Açıkgöz 1999), Kaysuni advised drinking coffee after meals to help
digestion unless the person was in a phlegmatic mood (Ünver 1963).
The views of religious authorities and the public response to them reflected such
health deliberations too. Although the above-mentioned fatwa declared coffeehouse practices
to be sinful, a later fatwa, issued by Bostanzade, a subsequent Şeyhülislam who served during
1589-1592, affirmed coffee as a beneficial drink. It listed the numerous health benefits such
as releasing pain, preventing vomiting and inhalation problems, eliminating pustules in the
eye, relaxing, sharpening thinking, banishing sadness, and preventing sleepiness. However,
an anonymous poet criticized Bostanzade’s fatwa:
Nobody drinks the black faced coffee, except the disgraced
Does the hedonist drink that black faced sherbet?
Constipation and dryness is its continuing nature

[Coffee] Incites illnesses within the body... (Açıkgöz 1999, 48):
This poet finds the coffee drinker sinful and the drink disagreeable and harmful to the body.
In response, a famous poet, Suluki wrote in favor of coffee and blamed the other poet with
lunacy and ignorance (Açıkgöz 1999, 49).
Oh lunatic! bad-tempered, disgraced, who blames coffee
Go and get physician’s sherbet for your melancholy
Oh prodigal! Don’t talk pretentiously about science that coffee is dry

Don’t base the illness in your nature to it [coffee].
Another poet, Nev’i focused on the beneficial, stimulating, and productivity-enhancing

effects rather than pleasurable aspects of coffee consumption (Açıkgöz 1999, 13):
Why the official behaves unjust to the coffee seller
If he drinks coffee, would a Muslim become an infidel?
Cannot lecture the next day, cannot read books at nights

If a teacher would not drink two cups of coffee
Such debates not only point to the approvals and disapprovals within the health discourse,
but, more importantly, indicate that coffee consumption was a noteworthy object of public
opinion.
In the 17th century, the medical discourse on coffee traveled to the Europe. For
example, Sir Francis Bacon refers to the Turks when he mentions the mind-stimulating
effects of coffee (Hattox 1996). A coffee advertisement, which was published in Public
Adviser in 1657, reflects the British physicians’ views on the health benefits of coffee and is
very similar to Bostanzade’s fatwa (Weinberg and Bealer 2002, 150):
“Coffee, which is a very wholsom and Physical drink, … fortifies the heat within,
helpeth Digestion, quickneth the Spirits, maketh the heart lightsome, is good against
eye-sores, Coughs, or Colds, Rhumes, Consumptions, Head-ach, Dropsie, Gout…”
The European health discourse was used to market coffee as a beneficial drink. Due to its
alleged anti-erotic and mind-stimulating effects, coffee became the favored drink of the
Protestant ideology (Schievelbusch 2000). In England, unlike wine, coffee was thought to
motivate people to work. Moreover, its anti-erotic nature represented asceticism and a life
purified from sin. Twentieth-century US coffee advertising also emphasized productivity and
work as well as leisure. As with globalization today, during the early modern period, not only
the goods but also the associated discourses traveled across borders; and at times in
reinterpreted and recontextualized forms.
In sum, we locate four countervailing discourses which contribute to the constitution
of the coffeehouse culture. Although the formal orthodox discourse would be expected to
have prevented coffeehouse consumption, we find that this is not the case. Consumption in
coffeehouses was a heated topic of public debate. Many conflicting publics discussed the
issue, voicing a multiplicity of opinions, as in other societies (Fraser 1999). Such diversity in
opinions and debates also attest to the formation of a public sphere. Moreover, this setting
provided a fertile ground for consumer resistance.
RESISTANCE AND THE

CONSTITUTION OF THE COFFEEHOUSE CULTURE AND THE CONSUMER
The above-discussed sumptuary laws, bans on coffeehouses, decrees and fatwas are
institutional strategies (de Certeau 1988) which attempted to prescribe consumers’ everyday
lives. However, the repetitions of the 16th-century bans on coffeehouses, the reissuance of the
decree reordering the governor to abolish coffeehouses, the apparent inability of the kadıs to
contain illicit coffeehouse activities, and the circumvention of sumptuary laws all reveal that
the consumers did not obey the laws and regulations. Instead, they persevered in attending the
coffeehouses and demanding its pleasures. This perseverance substantiates that these
consumers of leisure contested the two-headed governance strategies—of the state and the
religion—aimed at creating obedient subjects. Even their mere attendance to illicit
coffeehouses was transgressive. Since transgression necessitates an agency that defies
boundaries, breaks rules, and threatens the established order (Jenks 2003; Jervis 1999), it
implies an active consuming subject. With their persistence, consumers played a role in
shaping the market, the coffeehouse culture. Furthermore, consumers had at their disposal
countervailing discourses which would have enabled them to negotiate the official discourse
of orthodox Islam and give alternative meanings to and legitimize their resistive leisure
consumption practices. Thus, the diversity of the discourses provided the potential for
subjects to define themselves as consumers of leisure and the coffeehouse as a legitimate site
of leisure. It also provided a similar potential to the guilds and the businessmen to resist the
regulations and justify the coffeehouse. Over time, with the multiparty resistance and
continuous redefinition of practices and values, the coffeehouse culture was instituted.
Tactics of Resistance
Consumers, as well as the guilds joining up with them, employed the three unofficial
discourses while carrying out various forms of resistance or tactics (de Certeau 1988). Tactics
are practices that transgressed the order and were defined and justified through discursive
negotiation processes. We find different modes of negotiating and legitimizing and mixed
manners of leisure consumption entailing varied levels of transgression.
Transgressive Tactic: Leisure as Escape. Taking drugs was one of the most illicit
pleasures of the coffeehouse. An account of a theatrical play about coffeehouses indicates
how drug-using consumers utilized the discourses of pleasure, health, and Sufi Islam in
resisting official Islam and establishing the coffeehouse as a site of leisure. This play was
staged by a coffeehouse guild in 1582 during a festival in Istanbul, where the sultan was in
the audience too (Korkmaz 2004, Öztekin 1996). According to a period court narrator,
Intizami, the scene opened with seemingly elite customers spending enjoyable time in a
spacious corner of the coffeehouse, drinking coffee and conversing (Korkmaz 2004). After
drinking their first cups of coffee, the ostensibly poor and drug-addicted customers asked the
shop owner for more coffee and begged that he at least boil the grounds left in their cups, for
free. The elite, witnessing the situation felt sympathy for the drug addicts and asked the
coffeehouse owner to be generous. In the meantime, the addicts lapsed into drug comas,
people gathered around them, and the coffeehouse owner was dismayed. The play concluded
with the harmful effects of drugs and the beneficial effects of coffee: the drug addicts grasp
the reality and feel worse after the temporary feelings of ecstasy and escape; coffee on the
other hand, helps one stay awake and eliminates the ill effects of drugs. Finally, the eminent
Sheikh Şazeli, the alleged pioneer of the use of coffee in his order, was named as the reason
for attending coffeehouses.
This play and the commentaries illustrate how coffeehouse consumption practices
were legitimated through discursive negotiations. Most powerfully, Sufi discourse constitutes
the finale. An understated but prevalent pleasure discourse—the socio- and
physiopleasures—is evident in the references to the consuming styles of the elite whom the
court was more likely to favor than other attendees. The narrator, allied with the court and its
official Islam, acknowledged, even if mockingly, the health discourse at work in the play too.
Paradoxically, the very portrayal of drug addicts and their coffeehouse experiences
constructs the coffeehouse as a site of transgressive escape from everyday life and as a site of
ecstasy akin to the contemporary demand for prohibited things such as illicit raves (Goulding
et al. 2009), or more broadly, transgressive consumption desires (Belk et al. 2003). Like
cigarettes (Klein 1993), what makes illicit coffeehouse activities pleasurable is resisting
reason that tells us not to do something bad or harmful. While some period books, especially
those presented to or sponsored by the court attribute drug usage in coffeehouses to “a few
despondent idlers” (Korkmaz 2004, Şeker 1997), other data indicate that it was more
widespread. For example, opium consumption was reportedly very popular among the elite
from the 17th century onwards (Koçu 1946). Not only the poor and idle drug addicts, but also
the wealthy and the respectable seem to have enjoyed transgressive escape in coffeehouses.
Thus, a wide range of consumers, rather than accept the prohibitions and be the
obedient subjects of the sultan, chose to engage in improper or illicit activities. Despite or
perhaps due to the risks of being arrested or health, they pursued leisurely pleasures and
escape in the coffeehouse—a venue for such transgressions. It is clear that the newly forming
coffeehouse consumer was capable of resisting the authorized order and constructing himself
as a consumer of leisure.
A Less Transgressive Tactic: Leisure for the Sake of Poetry. Meeting in the
coffeehouses for the sake of enjoying the ideopleasures of poetry was a manner of
coffeehouse consumption usually attributed to the admired men-of-letters. Another account
of the above-mentioned festival also includes a theatrical play, staged again by a coffeehouse
guild, and reveals how poetry enthusiasts negotiated the discourses of pleasure and orthodox
Islam in defining their coffeehouse consumption practices (Öztekin 1996). Gelibolu’lu
reports that this play started with a scene from a peaceful coffeehouse where the owner was
making coffee and young customers were reciting poetry from printed sheets (Öztekin 1996).
Suddenly, officers who were responsible for market regulations attack the coffeehouse for not
observing the ban. The owner of the coffee shop escapes but officers destroy the coffeehouse,
break the coffee cups, and tie the hands of poetry-reading customers. The play ends with
coffeehouse guild members’ complaints to the sultan that unjust offenses were frequently
applied despite the peaceful conduct at the coffeehouses and their pleas for putting an end to
the ban and the raids. Gelibolu’lu Âlî comments that although the sultan enjoyed the play and
removed the ban, coffeehouses were banned again later (Öztekin 1996).
In this account, the guild members’ comments reveal that such raids were framed as
an unjust punishment of poetry lovers. The ethos of “justice” was used in support of the
consumers of illicit coffeehouses and in requesting the prevention of such injustice by the
representatives of the sultan. Besides, although orthodox Islam regarded coffeehouse
consumption to be harmful to society, it considered poetry reading and writing to be
appropriate types of pleasure-seeking and forms of refined aesthetic taste (Öztürk 1991).
Moreover, morality books of the period recommended supporting poets and giving gifts to
them (Öztürk 1991), much like charitable donations and sponsorships. Thus, the admirable
status of poetry and its ideopleasures gave rise to the overlap between orthodox Islam and the
pleasure discourse, which put the former to its own use in this case. Although enjoying
leisure for the sake of poetry was less transgressive than the use of drugs, the coffeehouse
consumer still transgressed by attending the illegal site in the first place. Joining hands with
the coffee shop guilds in using the countervailing discourses, he rejected the legal authority
and instead constructed himself as a consumer of leisure.
The Least Transgressive Tactic: Limiting Leisure. Orthodox Islam’s work ethic
deemed spending long hours in the coffeehouse to be improper and detrimental to society as
it took time away from earning a living and/or praying. However, a mix of the discourses of
pleasure, Sufism, and orthodox Islam enabled justification of spending a limited amount of
time. Firstly, the spiritual role of coffee drinking in Sufi rituals was cited. For example, the
16th-century Sufi poet Süluki criticized the people who were against coffeehouses as being
ignorant of the origins of drinking coffee in Şazeli’s Sufi order (Açıkgöz 1999). A period
scholar, Gelibolu’lu describes the act of limiting leisure in his etiquette book as follows
(Şeker 1997, 364):
… some members of Sufi orders come [to coffeehouses]. They find it appropriate just
to drink their coffee and leave. The consideration of such people is that coffee is the
elixir of the ones who follow God because coffee ingratiates itself with someone like
Sheikh Şazeli, who reached the grace of God. While he [coffee] was a black tanned
beloved from Yemen, the fortune in the glance of the Sheikh made him the beloved of
the hearts. Therefore, the people continuing mystical orders are in love with him.
This tactic was the least transgressive also because spending a short time at a site of leisure
demonstrated some obedience to the work ethic. Then, the enjoyment obtained from the
coffeehouse experience was allegedly limited only to the physiopleasures of tasting coffee
and not the leisurely activities.
Overall, we see that consumers resisted the order by attending the coffeehouse and
formed and justified such trangressive practices by mixing various ethics.
Normalization of the Consuming Subject and Legalization of the Coffeehouse
Such resistance was neither limited to a small group of rebels, nor reserved for
individuals. It was not inconsequential either. Enacted repeatedly, by a much broader range of
people than the state and the religion would have liked, the above tactics served to construct
different self-ethics by a range of coffeehouse-goers, who, along with coffeehouse owners,
persisted in resisting until the coffeehouse was legalized and normalized. Concurrent with the
transformation in the state and the religious institution, the consumer subject who resisted the
order and was active in defining self-ethics was normalized through interactions within the
newly emerging public sphere.
Extensive Resistance across Roles and Classes and Constructing Self-ethics. Official
accounts such as decrees and the period festival and etiquette books attributed particular
tactics to specific types of people. Transgressive escape was attributed to drug users assumed
to be the idlers or the janissaries who supposedly wasted entire days in the coffeehouse,
“gossiping, backbiting, and self-praising” (Şeker 1997; 218); consumers who limited their
time in the coffeehouse were believed to be Sufis; and consuming leisure for the sake of
poetry was accredited to the men-of-letters, the elite (Dağlıoğlu 1940; Korkmaz 2004; Şeker
1997). However, portrayals of the everyday lives of poets, such as Gulami, Atâ, and Beliğ in
Aşık Çelebi’s period anthology and other sources on everyday life reveal that the practices
and tactics of consumers were not bound by their social positions: for example, many
reputable poets used drugs and some janissaries were also poetry enthusiasts (Kılıç 1994;
Koçu 1946).
One example which indicates that not only the “despondent idlers” but also ruling
class members could enjoy the pleasures of drugs, albeit alongside the ideopleasures of
poetry, was Gulami. A 16th-century poet of slave origin, he was known for his addiction to
narcotics and seen in coffeehouses in a state of drowsiness (Kılıç 1994). After completing his
education at a theological school, he was appointed as an assistant functionary thus became a
member of the ruling class. He reportedly attended the coffeehouse for both transgressive
escape and for the sake of poetry. Gulami’s life story also indicates that someone from the
lowest echelons of society could get a prestigious education and attain an esteemed status and
thus illustrates the above-discussed fluidity of social structure.
Another poet, Atâ was a physician. Aşık Çelebi states in his tezkire that although Atâ
was a court physician, he spent most of his time in the coffeehouse and went home only
occasionally, “as if a guest” (Kılıç 1994). He uses a telling magic lantern metaphor in
describing Atâ: a regular, like the indispensable decoration of the coffeehouse, whose pale
and slender look due to drug addiction resembled the dim light of the lantern. Atâ’s story
demonstrates that even a person so close to the palace and with an education based on
orthodox Islam could transgress the work ethic and become a coffeehouse regular.
Yet another role-crosser was Beliğ: a janissary, a famous poet, and a coffee
aficionado. Aşık Çelebi portrays Beliğ as more of poet than a responsible man-at-arms.
Beliğ’s following poem demonstrates the popularity and the commercial value of coffee and
the physiopleasures of coffee and the coffeehouse (Kılıç 1994, 191):
Although coffee is not as graceful as wine
The blood of that black-faced [coffee] is still warm
Does it [coffee] have a match or an equivalent in attracting customers?

Who wishes to get attention [literally a warm face], wants it...
….That world seducer took the place of wine.
Has a desire for money, wanders around, coinizes [becoming coin]

I don’t know if the coffeehouse owner’s boy [servant] is deceitful/prostitute...”
Finding the taste of wine superior to coffee, Beliğ expresses his admiration for the forbidden
wine. He remarks that coffee substituted wine by providing warmth. The last verse of the
poem moves to a young servant in the coffeehouse. Beliğ might be concerned if the servant
exploits consumers by overcharging them or if he cheats on his lover—either Beliğ himself or
someone else. At the least, this last verse implies his interest in young servants and the carnal
pleasures of the coffeehouse. Aşık Çelebi’s account attests that Beliğ enjoyed the refined
taste of poetry even though he was merely a janissary and wine even though he was a
Muslim; and perhaps he even had sexual encounters with boys. Beliğ seems to have merged
transgressive tactics with the dignified joys of poetry—an art not expected from a janissary.
Thus, people from different social classes consumed coffeehouses, at times, in
unprescribed or unexpected ways. The ruling class consumed drugs and janissaries wrote
poetry. Consumers could combine tactical resistances in their own ways to define and
legitimate their particular manner of coffeehouse consumption. It is clear that many did not
accept the moral codes but instead constructed their own ethics. Foucault (1990, 28) portrays
this type of subject as someone who “delimits that part of himself that will form the object of
his moral practice, defines his position relative to the precept he will follow, and decides on a
certain mode of being that will serve as his moral goal.” The range of moral modes and goals
underlying different consumer tactics implies that Ottoman coffeehouse consumers were
constructing their particular self-ethics while resisting orthodox Islam. For example, if
spending hours idle in the coffeehouse or losing consciousness to drugs were too
inappropriate for one, enjoying leisure time within the limits of the work ethic was
acceptable. Or consider Beliğ’s self-ethics: it was appropriate for him to enjoy the socio- and
ideopleasures of poetry discussions and the physiopleasures of drinking coffee or the
religiously forbidden wine or even the contact with attractive young servants. Therefore, the
Ottoman coffeehouse consumer was not only active in terms of resisting prescriptions but
also in defining particular self-ethics: he had become a consuming subject.
Interacting with others, across social classes, such subjects witnessed diverse manners
of resistance in the coffeehouse. They also heard or participated in discussions and readings
of poetry, puppet theatres, and stories that were frequently critical of the authorities. The site
was ripe for mimesis (Girard 1987) not only within but also across social classes. Thus, a
broad range of individuals of different social positions had the potential to use resistance
tactics, define self-ethics, and hence enact becoming consuming subjects. This potential was
not restricted to a small group: the consuming subject of mass consumption was in the
forming. The resistance tactics spread widely via the public debates about coffeehouses. The
discursive public sphere constituted an environment where different forms of consumption
were negotiated regularly, repeatedly, and, over time, normalized. Despite the dire
consequences of recurrent prohibitions, coffeehouses became widely popular. An analysis of
judicial records of the 17th-century Kudus, where the number of lawsuits about coffeehouses
decreased and disappeared gradually, also indicate normalization of coffeehouse consumption
(Cohen 2004). Thus, Gulami, Atâ, Beliğ, and many other consumers who frequented the
once-illicit coffeehouses, ultimately prevailed over the state and the religion.
Institutional Resistance and the Transformation in the State and the Religious
Institution. Consumers were not alone in constituting themselves as consuming subjects and
the coffeehouse culture. Institutions also played important roles. Coffeehouse owners and
their guilds resisted the political and religious authority by retaining their businesses despite
the bans and punishments. They utilized similar types of tactical resistances as the consumers
in legitimating coffeehouse consumption and negotiating with the authority, as exemplified in
the theatrical plays they staged and presented to the sultan. In addition, with such theatrical
plays, the guilds expanded the public debate about coffeehouse consumption outside the
physical space of the coffeehouse. The ongoing nature of their negotiations is perhaps
indicated by the temporary lifting of the ban after the sultan watched one of the plays. The
state’s inconsistent conduct in the face of insistent consumer and marketer resistance signals
its concession to negotiating with the consumer and the marketer. The temporary nature of
the bans resonates with what Pamuk (2004) calls the pragmatic, flexible, and negotiable
central bureaucracy co-opting and incorporating into the state the social groups that rebelled
against it. It also accords with other evidence regarding the loosening of the state’s grip on
the markets in general at the period (Pamuk1998). Over repeated bans and their abolishment,
the resistance of the coffeehouse owners became a routine aspect of their conduct as well. A
new habitus was in the forming (Bourdieu 1989).
As coffeehouses developed to occupy a significant place in social life, their input to
the economy increased. For example, the late 16th century tax registers from Kastamonu (an
Anatolian town, away from the more central Istanbul and Bursa) included a new item: taxes
levied upon the sale of coffee. In the next century, there was a large increase in the demand
for coffee and enormous amounts of coffee were traded (Faroqhi 1986). Gerber (1988)
reports that a merchant who traded between Egypt and Bursa left more than one and a half
tons of coffee among his possessions when he died in 1677. By the 17th century, even some
bureaucrats and theology professors had acquired lucrative coffeehouses (Baykal 1981). The
consumers’ and the guild’s joint resistances shifted the role of the market from that of
maintaining social order to generating revenue for the state.
While coffeehouse consumption was turning into an ordinary practice with increasing
economic benefits to the state, the religious authority’s views regarding coffee and
coffeehouse consumption shifted as well. We discussed above the contradictory fatwas issued
in the span of two decades, first against and then in favor of coffeehouses. The latter fatwa
declared coffee as appropriate stating that it does not make people drunk and listing its health
benefits. The period chronicler stated that this fatwa legitimated coffee consumption in the
Ottoman society (Baykal 1981). Interestingly, in this case, the religious authority used a
secular and a rational rather than a religious discourse in endorsing coffee and coffeehouses.
As (consumer and market) resistance became commonplace and coffeehouse
consumption an everyday activity, yielding greater tax income to the state, the once-repeated
bans were totally lifted in the late 17th century. Initial resistance and the subsequent
normalization of coffeehouses was concurrent with first the inconsistencies and later the
changes in the discursive practices of the state and the religious authority. Repeated consumer
and marketer transgressions paved the way to the reproduction of coffeehouse culture by
continuously redefining practices and values. The coffeehouse, including its objects, rituals,
layout, and design and the roles of its customers, owners, servants, and performers was
formed among the countervailing discourses in the Ottoman public sphere. As this novel
commercial site of leisure was being formed and legalized, an active consumer who had the
ability to use preferred resistance tactics and define his own particular consumption practices
and self-ethics was in the forming too.
DISCUSSION
Our cultural-historical analysis contributes to a less studied area of consumer culture

theory: historical and institutional shaping of the consumer and the marketplace as a social
category (Arnould and Thompson 2005). We find that both an active consumer and a market
were forming within the budding 16th and 17th century Ottoman consumer culture, through
the interactions of market actors like consumers, marketers, the state, and the religious
institutions. In doing so, we also contribute to the view that rather than posing two authentic
forms, the global and the local have each been socio-historically constructed (Kjeldgaard and
Ostberg 2007): we empirically demonstrate such foundations at 16th-century Ottomans,
earlier than the 17th-century Europe that Kjeldgaard and Ostberg propose.
The present study is restricted to leisure consumption among male consumers in
Ottoman coffeehouses. While our findings are limited to men, we provide a counterpoint to
historical studies most of which locate women as the vanguard of consumption and formation
of consumer culture (Campbell 1987; Rappaport 2004; Reekie 1993; Veblen 1899/1994;
Vickery 1993; Walkowitz 1992). We show that men also played a significant role in this
formation—at least for leisure consumption. In addition, we find the use of a combination of
visual and textual data highly informative and thus recommend it for historical research.
Our study supports and extends two broader theoretical claims: (1) consumption
resolves the tension between the individuals’ pursuit of pleasure and morality (Belk et al.
2003) and (2) market cultures are co-created through discursive negotiations and practices
(Peñaloza 2000; Thompson 2004). Much like Belk et al.’s (2003) self-managing consumer
who moderates his/her consumption acts in order to feel or become an ethical person,
Ottoman coffeehouse consumer was active in defining his self-ethics. We extend Belk et al.
(2003) by introducing and specifying the role transgression plays in the formation of self-
ethics: consumers transgressed in different ways and at different levels depending on their
negotiation of the tension between the pursuit of pleasure and pursuit of religious morality.
We also incorporate the institutional forces and the interaction between the individual and the
institutional actors in this process. In a counter-symmetrical fashion, our study extends
Peñaloza’s (2000) conceptualization of the co-creation of market cultures by drawing
attention to the tensions at the individual level. Our explication of the roles played by the
state and the religious institution extends Thompson (2004) and Peñaloza (2000) by situating
the co-creation of market cultures in a network of actors broader than the marketer-consumer
dyad; actors include customers, marketers—i.e. coffeehouse owners—the state, and the
religious institution. We emphasize that the formation of market cultures and their consuming
subjects is not only a socio-cultural but also a political and moral phenomenon located in the
broader public sphere.
The formation and normalization of Ottoman coffeehouse culture and its consumer
subject rest on the fundamental tension between Ottoman man’s pursuit of socio-, ideo-, and
phsiopleasures and his pursuit of morality: he is caught between the transgresive joys of the
coffeehouse and his morals. He attempts to resolve this tension by drawing from various
resources and taking advantage of the opportunities available in the nexus of a growing
public sphere, multiplicity of discourses, mutual resistances of the consumer and the market,
and flexible political and religious institutions. If we continue with the focus on the
individual consumer, he redefines and justifies his pleasurable yet transgressive consumption
practices and tactics by using the countervailing discourses circulating in the public sphere.
Emergence of a public sphere, in turn, was enabled by the fluid social structure of the era as
well as the features of the site. The socially mobile urbanites had the opportunity to interact
with people of all walks of life in the socially-leveling environment of the coffeehouse—a
novel site with few clearly defined norms. We have seen that coffeehouses constituted an
ideal context for a public sphere to flourish where interaction among consumers with
different social positions generated playful, aesthetic, and rational modes of communication
and criticism. Such interaction is likely to have created a mimetic process where various
tactics were adopted, appropriated, negotiated, and redefined by a very diverse group of
consumers. This finding has an interesting implication for the literature on public sphere:
consistent with much of the CCT literature, criticism can be politically effective even if based
on playful communicative interaction rather than a purely rational one.
The vibrancy of this context and the eventual legitimization of coffeehouse
consumption were clearly shaped by the co-existence of two strong religious discourses
rather than only one. This situation is similar to the co-existent Calvinist and humanistic
ethics in the 16th- and 17th-century Netherlands (Schama 1987) and the Protestant and
Romantic ethics in 18th-century England (Campbell 1987)—eras when European consumer
culture was developing. The Dutch humanist discourse provided legitimization for
expenditure rather than capital accumulation, as a way to free oneself from the suspicion of
greed. It promoted expenditure for the benefit of community, such as philanthropy, lending to
public institutions, or even spending money for feasts and providing a comfortable life to
one’s own family (Schama 1987). Similarly, the Romantic ethic made room for hedonism in
England (Campbell 1987). It seems that, in different cultures, the duality of ethical discourses
allowed for legitimization of consumption and development of consumer cultures. Dutch
humanism, British romanticism, and Ottoman Sufism supported philanthropic and domestic,
hedonic, and leisure consumption, respectively. Thus, in a context of dual ethics, public
debate, multiparty resistance, and repeated transgressions, the coffeehouse consumer and his
consumption were formed.
Consumers were supported by an ally—marketers. Coffeehouse owners’
resistances—such as their disobedience of the codes and theatrical plays—contributed to the
persistence of the coffeehouses and therefore provided the opportunity for consumers to
repeat and experiment with their trangressive and pleasurable actions. Embedded in such a
public sphere of diverse modes of behavior and discourses, and supported by the marketers,
the coffeehouse consumer was able to defy prescriptions and instead assemble his own ethics.
Repeated and proliferated, the once-transgressive coffeehouse consumption practices became

routine in the everyday life of Ottoman men. Such routinization reveal an active consumer
subject: he had been effective in forming his self-ethics and enacting his personal
understanding of how to spend one’s leisure appropriately. This reveals a transformation
from an obedient (sultan’s) subject to a consuming subject who resists the order and utilizes
alternative discourses to define his own pleasurable practices and self-ethics.
Finally, the increasing flexibility of the state as well as the inconsistencies in the
discursive practices of the state and the religious authority were also opportune for the
normalization of the coffeehouse. Rather than applying rigid rules, the state was open to
negotiations with the guilds and the eventual change of conventions. The emergent public
sphere, including the proliferating defiances and negotiations of marketers and consumers,
constituted the loci of resistance to the political sphere, consistent with other evidence
regarding the presence of a public sphere and political negotiation in the Ottoman society of
the era (Kafadar 1994). As coffeehouse consumption was being routinized over a century, the
state’s and the religious authority’s discursive practices were transforming as well.
Eventually, and similar to the 18th-century England (Agnew 1993), markets gained agency in
determining the attributes of truth and materiality: what was regarded to be appropriate about
coffee, coffeehouse, leisure, and pleasure was defined by market relations instead of religion.
In sum, the constitution of an active consumer and a coffeehouse culture was enabled by a
particular set of conditions: emergent public sphere, multiplicity of discourses, consumer-
marketer alliance in resistance, and the increasing flexibility of political and religious
governance. In the process, each –party and field transformed.
Implications for the Literature on Ottoman History
With a few recent exceptions (Faroqhi 2002; Grehan 2007; Quataert 2000),
consumption is an under-researched topic in Ottoman historiography. Most research focuses
on production, material culture, or trade rather than consumption; the few studies which
approximate consumption, emphasize the luxury possessions in the palace or among the elite
(Artan 2000; Faroqhi 2004; Neumann 2004; Tezcan 2004). Thus, our research is an early and
preliminary exploration of the more ordinary Ottoman consumer and the broader consumer
culture. Therefore, this study extends Ottoman consumption studies from a unidirectional
study of objects to a study of complex market relationships between products, consumers,
and institutions that define Ottoman consumer culture. Our findings call for complementary
investigations, perhaps focusing on bathhouse consumption among women.
Reflections on Consumer Resistance
Contemporary consumer research constructs a resisting and self-defining subject, who

juxtaposes different meanings from a variety of discourses in order to assemble own identity
instead of accepting the impositions from the marketer (Belk et al. 2003; Brown et al. 2003;
Fırat and Venkatesh 1995; Kozinets et al. 2004; Maclaran and Brown 2005; Thompson
2004). This resisting consumer is understood to gain a certain level of freedom of choice
against the marketer in the capitalist market system (Denegri-Knott, Zwick, and Schroeder
2006; Slater 1997). Yet, another strand of research argues that the contemporary consumer is
not powerful or revolutionary enough to change the market structure (Holt 2002). We find
that the Ottoman consumer resisted and gained a certain level of freedom of choice not
against the marketer but against the impositions of the state and the religious institution, both
of which were market actors too. He succeeded in this situation where he and the marketer
had joined forces in enacting resistance. Thus, the market and the consumer do not always
have to be oppositional; the market can help the consumer resist and transform the order.
Furthermore, our findings, in accordance with Holt (2002), imply that in order for consumer
resistance to be successful, individual’s alliance with an institution—even the market itself—
and the existence of a public sphere are necessary.
Interestingly, Giesler’s (2008) results about music consumption cohere with our
proposition. Akin to the Ottoman coffeehouse consumer, Giesler’s (2008, 746) contemporary
consumer (re)defines self-ethics—“downloading was not a cultural transgression, as
producers promoted, but rather a liberatory move away from aesthetic and cultural
repression”—and has a role in transforming the music market. And like the Ottoman case,
this happens when the individual joins forces with an institution—the Internet, which at the
same time is a medium of public sphere. Thus, it seems that when a subject and an institution
establish an alliance in resisting the existing market structure, they can successfully transform
the market structure.
While research has tended to focus mostly on the consumer-marketer relationship,
other marketplace actors also play important roles in consumption. In addition to the Internet
(Giesler 2008), market actors include science/medicine (Thompson 2004) and religion
(Sandikci and Ger 2010). Also, consider the governmental attempts to create ideal consumer-
citizens who commit to consumption in order to fuel the economy (Cohen 2003) or the
prohibitions on smoking, gambling, or rave (Goulding et al. 2009). Thus, we suggest that the
interaction and potential alliance between the consumers and each of a network of market
actors are worthy of further research on consumer resistance and market transformations.
Reflections on Understandings of Consumer Culture and the “Consumer”
In following Poster’s (1989) call for investigating the role of consumer subject in the
development of consumer culture, we demonstrate that “democratization” of consumer
culture goes well beyond a spread of consumption to masses (McKendrick 1982; Plumb
1982). There was also democratization in the sense of active participation in institutional,
individual, and cultural domains (Benhabib 1999; Habermas 1992). The changes in the
legislation on coffeehouses as a result of joint resistances of the guilds and the consumers, the
constitution of a variety of self-ethics, and the reproduction of coffeehouse culture entailed
participative formations.
In accordance with Borgerson (2005), we problematize the premise of the recent
advent of a new type of postmodern or post-traditional consumer. Consumer research locates
this active consumer as a subject that is identified with the capitalist or the late capitalist
market system (Fırat and Dholakia 1998; Fırat and Venkatesh 1995; Slater 1997). Obviously,
the early modern Ottoman context was very different than any modern capitalist system.
However, the fluidity and the variety of roles, authorities, and discourses as well as the
resistance tactics imply that the active consumer may not be as recent or even a chronological
phenomenon as many consumer researchers think. Similarly, we see that markets and
consumers have long been embedded in global networks and the hybrid global-local forms of
consumption objects goes back to at least the16th century. We also see that not only the goods
but also the associated discourses traveled across borders, albeit in reinterpreted and
recontextualized forms, as with contemporary globalization.
As Trentmann (2006, 51) suggests “the genealogy of the consumer is not a linear
story, nor does it converge.” Existence of an active consumer in the early modern Ottoman
era challenges the claim that modern consumer culture originated during the 17th to the 19th
century Western Europe and North America and then spread throughout the globe (Campbell
1987; McCracken 1988; McKendrick et al. 1982; Mukerji 1983; Roche 2000; Schama 1987).
Contrary to (possibly Orientalist) expectations, Ottoman coffeehouse culture may well have
played a major role in the diffusion of leisure consumption. Investigations of formations of
consumers and consumer cultures in a variety of places and eras and with alternative
historical trajectories will enlighten consumer researchers’ understandings of nonlinearity and
of ethnoconsumerisms (Venkatesh 1995).
Moreover, studying alternative historical and contemporary contexts will help
researchers identify generalizations based on the commonalities in the formation of different
consumer cultures and subjects. Our findings corroborate Trentmann (2006; 21) who shows
that the development of the consumer points to “the centrality of political tradition, civil
society and ethics through which agents discovered themselves as active consumers,” even
though our consumers lived earlier and in a different geography. It is evident that future
studies on the political and ethical setting of consumption as well as a closer dialogue
between consumption studies and contemporary historiography are called for.
Another crucial commonality with investigations of more recent eras is that the 16th-
th
and 17 -century Ottoman consumer is also a consuming subject in that he pursued his own
choices and defined his own ethics. This consumer is similar to Campbell’s (1987) 18th-
century English consumer in being active and self-defining. However, while Campbell
emphasizes the role of imaginative hedonism, our findings converge on a transgressively
hedonistic consumer: he followed his own hedonistic choice by fighting for it. Granted, his
choice was also fed by imaginations such as the paradise metaphors. Our findings imply that
transgression may well have been constitutive of “the consumer,” as it is constitutive of
contemporary consumer desires (Belk et al. 2003); that is, transgression is integral and vital
for consumer subjectivity. Alternatively, consumption serves a venue for transgression,
complementary to its role in identity construction and relationship building. And markets, just
as they can be a target for resistance, may also provide an ally and resource to the consumers
in their quest for transgression of some social order of everyday life.
REFERENCES
Abou-El-Haj, Rifa'at 'Ali (2005), Formation of the Modern State: The Ottoman Empire,
Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries, Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University.
Abu-Lughod, Lila (1999), Veiled Sentiments, Berkeley, CA: University of California.
Açıkgöz, Namık (1999), Kahvename, Ankara: Akçağ.
Agnew, Jean-Christophe (1993), Worlds Apart: The Market and the Theater in Anglo-
American Thought, 1550-1750, New York, NY: Cambridge University.
Altınay, Ahmet Refik (1988), 16. Asırda İstanbul Hayatı, İstanbul: Enderun.
And, Metin (1975), Karagöz: Turkish Shadow Theatre, Ankara: Dost.
____________ (1993), 16. Yüzyılda İstanbul, İstanbul: Akbank.
____________ (2004), Osmanlı Tasvir Sanatları 1: Minyatür, İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası.
Anderson, David M. and Neil Carrier (2006), “‘Flowers of Paradise’or ‘Polluting the
Nation’? Contested Narratives of Khat Consumption,” in Consuming Cultures, Global
Perspectives, ed. John Brewer and Frank Trentmann, New York, NY: Berg, 145-66.
Andrews, Walter G. (1985), Poetry’s Voice, Society’s Song, Seattle, WA: University of
Washington.
Andrews, Walter G. and Mehmet Kalpaklı (2005), The Age of Beloveds: Love and the
Beloved in Early Modern Ottoman and European Culture and Society, London: Duke
University.
Arendonk, Cornelis van (2009), “Kahwa,” in Encyclopedia of Islam, ed. Peri Bearman,
Thierry Bianquis, Clifford Edmund Bosworth, Emeri van Donzel and Wolfhart P.
Heinrichs, Brill Online, http://www.brillonline.nl/subscriber/entry?entry=islam_COM-
0418.
Arnould, Eric J. and Linda L. Price (1993), “River Magic: Extraordinary Experience and the
Extended Service Encounter,” Journal of Consumer Research, 20 (June), 24-55.
Arnould, Eric J. and Craig J. Thompson (2005), “Consumer Culture Theory (CCT): Twenty
Years of Research,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (March), 868-82.
Artan, Tülay (2000), “Aspects of the Ottoman Elite’s Food Consumption: Looking for
Staples, Luxuries, and Delicacies in a Changing Century,” in Consumption Studies and
the History of the Ottoman Empire, ed. Donald Quataert, New York, NY: State
University of New York, 107-200.
Arvidsson, Adam (2003), Marketing Modernity: Italian Advertising from Fascism to the
Postmodernity, London: Routledge.
Ayvazoğlu, Beşir (1992), Güller Kitabı: Türk Çiçek Kültürü Üzerine Bir Deneme, İstanbul:
Ötüken.
Barkey, Karen (1997), Bandits and Bureucrats: The Ottoman Route to State Centralization,
Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
Batchelor, Robert (2006), “On the Movement of Porcelains: Rethinking the Birth of
Consumer Society as Interactions of Exchange Networks, 1600-1750,” in Consuming
Cultures, Global Perspectives: Historical Trajectories, Transnational Exchanges, ed.
John Brewer and Frank Trentmann, NY, New York: Berg, 95-122.
Baxandall, Michael (1988), Painting and Experience in 15th Century Italy, Oxford: Oxford
University.
Baykal, Bekir Sıtkı, ed. (1981), Peçevi Tarihi, Cilt 1, Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı.
Belk, Russell W. (1995), Collecting in a Consumer Society, London: Routledge.
Belk, Russell W., Güliz Ger, and Søren Askegaard (2003), “The Fire of Desire: A Multi-
Sited Inquiry into Consumer Passion,” Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (December),
326-51.
Belk, Russell W., Melanie Wallendorf, and John F. Sherry, Jr. (1989), “The Sacred and the
Profane in Consumer Behavior: Theodicy on the Odyssey,” Journal of Consumer
Research, 16 (June), 1-38.
Benhabib, Seyda (1999), “Models of Public Space: Hannah Arendt, the Liberal Tradition, and
Jürgen Habermas,” in Habermas and the Public Sphere, ed. Craig Calhoun,
Cambridge, MA: MIT, 73-98.
Berry, Christopher J. (1994), The Idea of Luxury: A Conceptual and Historical Investigation,
Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Bingül, İlyaz (2004), “Kahvehane ve Eğlence,” Toplumsal Tarih, 126 (Haziran), 70-75.
Bonnell, Victoria and Hunt, Lynn (1999), “Introduction,” Beyond the Cultural Turn, ed.
Victoria Bonnell and Lynn Hunt, Los Angeles, CA: University of California, 1-34.
Borgerson, Janet (2005), “Materiality, Agency, and the Constitution of Consuming Subjects:
Insights for Consumer Research,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 32, ed.
Geeta Menon and Akshay R. Rao, Duluth, MN: Association for Consumer Research,
439-43.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1989), Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste, London:
Routledge.
Braudel, Fernand (1980), On History, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
____________ (1992), Civilization and Capitalism 15th – 18th Century: The Sturcture of
Everyday Life, Vol. 1, Berkeley CA: University of California.
____________ (1993), II. Felipe Döneminde Akdeniz ve Akdeniz Dünyası, Cilt 1, İstanbul:
İmge.
Brewer, John and Roy Porter eds. (1993), Consumption and the World of Goods, New York,
NY: Routledge.
Brown, Stephen, Robert Kozinets, and John F. Sherry Jr. (2003), “Teaching Old Brands New
Tricks: Retro Branding and the Revival of Brand Meaning,” Journal of Marketing, 67
(July), 19-33.
Campbell, Colin (1987), The Romantic Ethic and the Spirit of Modern Consumerism, New
York, NY: Basil Blackwell.
Carr, Edward Hallet (2001), What Is History? New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Carswell, John (1998), Iznik Pottery, London: British Museum.
Chittick, William C. (2005), Sufism: A Short Introduction, Oxford: Oneworld.
Clunas, Craig (2004), Superfluous Things: Material Culture and Social Status in Early
Modern China, Honolulu: University of Hawai'i.
Coffey, Amanda and Paul Atkinson (1996), Making Sense of Qualitative Data, Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cohen, Amnon (2004), “Osmanlı Kudüs'üne Kahvehanelerin Girişi: Edebe Aykırı Bir
Yeniliğin Muteber Hale Gelişi,” Toplumsal Tarih, 126 (Haziran), 58-64.
Cohen, Lizabeth (2003), A Consumers’ Republic: The Politics of Mass Consumption in
Postwar America, New York: Knopf.
Cotte, June (1997), “Chances, Trances and Lots of Slots: Gambling Motives and
Consumption Experiences,” Journal of Leisure Research, 29 (4), 380-406.
Çavuşoğlu, Mehmed (1977), “Zâtî’nin Letâyifi – II,” Türk Dili ve Edebiyatı Dergisi, 22, 143-
61.
Dağlıoğlu, Hikmet Turhan (1940), Onaltıncı Asırda Bursa, Bursa: Bursa Halk Evi Matbaası.
Dalsar, Fahri (1960), Bursa’da İpekcilik, İstanbul: Sermet.
Darnton, Robert (2001), The Great Cat Massacre, London: Penguin.
De Certeau, Michel (1988), The Practice of Everyday Life, Berkeley, CA: University of
California.
De Lemps, Alain Huetz (1999), “Colonial Beverages and the Consumption of Sugar,” in
Food: A Culiniary History from Antiquity to the Present, ed. John-Louis Flandrin and
Massimo Montanari, New York, NY: Columbia University, 383-93.
Denegri-Knott, Janice, Detlev Zwick, and Jonthan E. Schroeder (2006), “Mapping Consumer
Power: An Integrative Framework for Marketing and Consumer Research,” European
Journal of Marketing, 40 (9/10), 950-71.
De Vries, Jan (2008), The Industrious Revolution, New York, NY: Cambridge University.
Düzdağ, Ertuğrul (1998), Şeyhülislam Ebussu’ud Efendi’nin Fetvalarına Göre Kanuni
Devrinde Osmanlı Hayatı, İstanbul: Şule.
Eldem, Sedat Hakkı (1984a), Türk Evi. Cilt 1, İstanbul: Türkiye Anıt Çevre Turizm
Değerlerini Koruma Vakfı.
Eldem, Sedat Hakkı (1984b), Türk Evi. Cilt 2, İstanbul: Türkiye Anıt Çevre Turizm
Değerlerini Koruma Vakfı.
Ellis, Markman (2004), The Coffee House: A Cultural History, London: Weidenfeld and
Nicolson.
Erder, Leila and Suraiyya Faroqhi (1980), “The Development of the Anatolian Urban
Network During the Sixteenth Century,” Journal of Economic and Social History of the
Orient, 267-303.
Erzen, N. Jale (2002), “The Aesthetics of Space in Ottoman Architecture,” Understanding
Islamic Architecture, ed. Attilio Petruccioli and Khalil K. Pirani, London: Routledge,
57-64.
Esir, Hasan Ali (2001), “Lâmi‘î Çelebi’ye İsnat Edilen Bir Eser: Risâle-i Nefsü’l-Emr-i
Lâmi‘î,” İlmî Araştırmalar, 12, 111-20.
Fairchilds, Cissie (1993), “The Production and Marketing of Populuxe Goods in Eighteenth-
Century Paris,” in Consumption and the World of Goods, ed. John Brewer and Roy
Porter, London: Routledge, 228-49.
Faroqhi, Suraiya (1986), “Coffee and Spices: Official Ottoman Reactions to Egyptian Trade
in the Later Sixteenth Century,” Wiener Zeitschrift fur die Kunde des Morgenlandes,
Festschrift Andreas Tietze, 76, 87-93.
____________ (1997a), “Crisis and Change: 1590-1699,” in An Economic and Social History
of the Ottoman Empire 1600-1914, Vol. 2, ed. Halil İnalcık and Donald Quataert,
Cambridge: Cambridge University, 411-635.
____________ (1997b), Osmanlı Kültürü ve Gündelik Yaşam - Ortaçağ'dan Yirminci
Yüzyıla, İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı.
____________ (2002), Stories of Ottoman Men and Women İstanbul: Eren.
____________ (2004), “Female Costumes in Late Fifteenth Century Bursa,” in Ottoman
Costumes: From Textile to Identity, ed. Suraiya Faroqhi and Christoph K. Neumann,
İstanbul: Eren, 81-92.
____________ (2007), The Ottoman Empire and the World Around It, London: I.B. Tauris.
Fırat, A. Fuat and Nikhilesh Dholakia (1998), Consuming People: From Political Economy
to Theatres of Consumption, London: Routledge.
Fırat, A. Fuat and Alladi Venkatesh (1995), “Liberatory Postmodernism and the
Reenchantment of Consumption,” Journal of Consumer Research, 22 (December),
239-67.
Fisher, Sydney Nettleton (1971), The Middle East: A History, London: Routledge.
Fletcher, F. Joseph Jr. (1985), “Integrative History: Parallels and Interconnections in the
Early Modern Period, 1500-1800,” Journal of Turkish Studies, 9 (1), 37-58.
Foucault, Michel (1972/1998), The Archaeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on
Language, New York, NY: Pantheon.
____________ (1980), Power and Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, New
York, NY: Pantheon.
____________ (1990), The History of Sexuality: The Use of Pleasure, Vol. 2, New York,
NY: Vintage Books.
____________ (2000), “The Ethics of the Concern of the Self as a Practice of Freedom,” in
Ethics: Subjectivity and Truth, ed. Paul Rabinow, London: Penguin, 281-301.
Fraser, Nancy (1999), “Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of
Actually Existing Democracy,” in Habermas and the Public Sphere, ed. Craig Calhoun,
Cambridge, MA: MIT, 109-42.
Gerber, Haim (1988), Economy and Society in an Ottoman City: Bursa, 1600-1700,
Jerusalem: The Hebrew University.
Giesler, Markus (2008), “Conflict and Compromise: Drama in Marketplace Evolution,”

Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (April), 739-53.
Girard, René (1987), Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World, London: Athlone.
Goffman, Daniel (2004), Osmanlı Dünyası ve Avrupa: 1300-1700, İstanbul: Kitap Yayınevi.
Gökyay, Orhan Şaik (1980), Katip Çelebi: Mizanü’l Hak Fi-Ihtiyari’l-Ehakk, İstanbul:
Tercüman.
Goulding, Christina, Avi Shankar, Richard Elliott, and Robin Canniford (2009), “The
Marketplace Management of Illicit Pleasure,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35
(February), 759-71.
Grehan, James (2007), Everyday Life and Consumer Culture in 18th-Century Damascus,
Seattle, WA: University of Washington.
Gürtuna, Sevgi (1999), Osmanlı Kadın Giysisi, Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı.
Habermas, Jürgen (1992), The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, Cambridge:
Polity.
Hamadeh, Shirine (2008), The City’s Pleasures: Istanbul in the Eighteenth Century, Seattle,
WA: University of Washington.
Hattox, Ralph S. (1996), Coffee and Coffeehouses: The Origins of a Social Beverage in the
Medieval Near East, Seattle, WA: University of Washington.
Hirschman, Elizabeth C. and Morris B. Holbrook (1982), “Hedonic Consumption: Emerging
Concepts, Methods, and Propositions,” Journal of Marketing, 46 (Summer), 92-101.
Holt, Douglas B. (1995), “How Consumers Consume: A Typology of Consumption
Practices,” Journal of Consumer Research, 22 (June), 1-16.
____________ (1998), “Does Cultural Capital Structure American Consumption?” Journal of
Consumer Research, 25 (June), 1-25.
____________ (2002), “Why Do Brands Cause Trouble? A Dialectical Theory of Consumer
Culture and Branding,” Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (June), 70-90.
Holt, Douglas B. and Craig J. Thompson (2004), “Man-of-Action Heroes: The Pursuit of
Heroic Masculinity in Everyday Consumption,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31
(September), 425-40.
İnalcık, Halil (1969), “Capital Formation in the Ottoman Empire,” The Journal of Economic
History, 29 (March), 97-140.
____________ (1973), The Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age: 1300-1600, London:
Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
____________ (1974), “Turkish Impact on the Development of Modern Europe,” The
Ottoman State and its Place in the World History, ed. Kemal Karpat, Leiden: Brill, 51-
60.
____________ (1977), “Centralization and Decentralization in Ottoman Administration,” in
Studies in Eighteenth Century Islamic History, ed. Thomas Naff Roger Owen,
Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University, 27-52.
____________ (1988), “The Ruznamçe Registers of the Kadıasker of Rumeli,” Turcica, 20,
251-75.
____________ (1997), An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire: 1300-1600,
Vol. 1, ed. Halil İnalcık and Donald Quataert, Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1-
379.
İpekten, Haluk (1996), Divan Edebiyatında Edebi Muhitler, İstanbul: Milli Eğitim.
İsen, Mustafa (1989), “Divan Şairlerinin Mesleki Konumları,” Milli Eğitim, Sayı: 83 (Mart),
35-41.
Jenkins, Keith (2003), Re-Thinking History, London: Routledge.
Jenks, Chris (2003), Transgression, London: Routledge.

Jervis, John (1999), Transgressing the Modern: Explorations in the Western Experience of
Otherness, Oxford: Blackwell.
Kafadar, Cemal (1994) “The Ottomans and Europe,” in Handbook of European History,
1400-1600, Vol. 1, ed. Thomas A. Brady, Leiden: E.J. Brill, 589-636.
____________ (2007), “Janissaries and Other Riffraff of Ottoman Istanbul: Rebels without a
Cause?” in Identity and Identity Formation in the Ottoman World, ed. Baki Tezcan and
Karl K. Barbir, Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin, 113-34.
Karababa, Eminegül (2006), “Origins of a Consumer Culture in an Early Modern Context:
Ottoman Bursa,” unpublished dissertation, Department of Management, Faculty of
Business Administration, Bilkent University, Ankara 06800.
Kendall, Gavin and Gary Wickham (2003), Using Foucault's Methods, London: Sage.
Kılıç, Filiz (1994), “Meşa’ürü’ş-Şu’ara: İnceleme ve Tenkitli Metin,” unpublished
dissertation, Faculty of Literature, Gazi University, Ankara, 06500.
Kinberg, Leah (2008), “Paradise,” in Encyclopedia of the Qur'an, Vol. 4, ed. Jane Dammen
McAuliffe, Brill Online, http://www.brillonline.nl/subscriber/entry?entry=q3_COM-
00143.
Kjeldgaard, Dannie and Jacob Ostberg (2007), “Coffee Grounds and the Global Cup: Glocal
Consumer Culture in Scandinavia,” Consumption Markets and Culture, 10 (June), 175-
87.
Klein, Richard (1993), Cigarettes Are Sublime, London: Duke University.
Knysh, Alexander D. (2009), “Sufism and the Qur’an,” in Encyclopedia of Qur’an, ed. Jane
Dammen McAuliffe, Brill Online,
http://www.brillonline.nl/subscriber/entry?entry=q3_COM-00196.
Koçu, Reşat Ekrem ed. (1946) İstanbul Ansiklopedisi, Cilt.1, İstanbul: İstanbul.
Korkmaz, Gülsüm Ezgi (2004), “Sûrnâmelerde 1582 Şenliği,” unpublished masters
dissertation, Turkish Literature Department, Faculty of Humanities and Letters, Bilkent
University, Ankara, 06800.
Kozinets, Robert V., John F. Sherry, Jr, Diana Storm, Adam Duhachek, Krittinee
Nuttavuthisit, and Benet Deberry-Spence (2004), “Ludic Agency and Retail Spectacle,”
Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (December), 658-72.
Kömeçoğlu, Uğur (2005), “The Publicness and Sociabilities of the Ottoman Coffeehouse,”
The Public, 12 (2), 5-22.
Kunt, Metin (1983), The Sultan’s Servants: The Transformation of Ottoman Provincial
Government, 1550-1650, New York, NY: Columbia University.
Kurt, Yılmaz (1996), Osmanlıca Dersleri, Cilt.1, Ankara: Akçağ.
Kütükoğlu, Mübahat (1983), Osmanlılarda Narh Müessesesi ve 1640 Tarihli Narh Defteri,
İstanbul: Enderun.
Lears, T.J. Jackson (1983), “From Salvation to Self-Realization,” in The Culture of
Consumption, ed. Richard Wightman Fox and T.J. Jackson Lears, New York, NY:
Pantheon Books, 1-38.
Maclaran, Pauline and Stephen Brown (2005), “The Center Cannot Hold: Consuming the
Utopian Marketplace,” Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (December), 311-23.
MacLean, Gerald (2005), “Introduction: Re-Orienting the Renaissance,” in Re-Orienting the
Renaissance: Cultural Exchanges with the East, ed. Gerald MacLean, New York, NY:
Palgrave MacMacmillan, 1-28.
____________ (2007), Looking East: English Writing and the Ottoman Empire Before 1800,
New York, NY: Palgrave MacMacmillan.
McCracken, Grant David (1988) Culture and Consumption: New Approaches to the Symbolic
Character of Consumer Goods and Activities. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University.
McKendrick, Neil (1982), “The Consumer Revolution of Eighteenth Century England,” in
The Birth of a Consumer Society: The Commercialization of Eighteenth Century
England, ed. Neil McKendrick, John Brewer and John Harold Plumb, London: Europa,
3-33.
McKendrick, Neil, John Brewer, and John Harold Plumb, eds. (1982), The Birth of a
Consumer Society: The Commercialization of Eighteenth-Century England, London:
Europa.
Mukerji, Chandra (1983), From Graven Images: Patterns of Modern Materialism, New
York, NY: Columbia University.
Neumann, Chritoph K. (2004), “How Did a Vizier Dress in the Eighteenth Century?” in
Ottoman Costumes: From Textile to Identity, ed. Suraiya Faroqhi and Christoph K.
Neumann, Istanbul: Eren, 181-218.
Oldenburg, Ray (1999), The Great Good Place, Philadelphia, PA: Da Capo.
Öcalan, Hasan Basri (2000), Bursa’da Tasavvuf Kültürü (Onyedinci Yüzyıl), Bursa: Gaye
Kitabevi.
Öztekin, Ali (1996), Gelibolu’lu Mustafa Âlî: Cami'u’l-Buhur Der Mecalis-i Sur Ankara:
Türk Tarih Kurumu.
Öztürk, Hüseyin (1991), Kınalızade Ali Çelebi’de Aile, Ankara: T.C. Başbakanlık Aile
Araştırma Kurumu Başkanlığı.
Öztürk, Serdar (2005), “Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nda Kamusal Alanın Dinamikleri,” İletişim,
21, 95-124.
Pamuk, Şevket (1998), “Ottoman Interventionism in Economic and Monetary Affairs,” Revue
de Histoire Maghrebine, 25 (91/92), 361-67.
____________ (1999), Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Paranın Tarihi, İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı.
____________ (2004), “Institutional Change and the Longevity of the Ottoman Empire,
1500-1800,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 35 (Autumn), 225-47.
Panofsky, Erwin (1993), Perspective as Symbolic Form, New York, NY: Zone Books.
Peñaloza, Lisa (2000), “The Commodification of the West: Marketers’ Production of Culture
at a Western Stock Show and Rodeo,” Journal of Marketing, 64 (October), 82-109.
Peñaloza, Lisa and Mary C. Gilly (1999), “Marketer Acculturation: The Changer and the
Changed,” Journal of Marketing, 63 (July), 84-104.
Plumb, John Harold. (1982), “The Commercialization of Leisure,” in The Birth of a
Consumer Society: The Commercialization of Eighteenth Century England, ed. Neil
McKendrick, John Brewer and J.H. Plumb, London: Europa, 265-85.
Polanyi, Karl (1957), The Great Transformation, Boston, MA: Beacon.
Poster, Mark (1989), Critical Theory and Poststructuralism: In Search of a Context, Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University.
Quataert, Donald (1997), “Clothing Laws, State, and Society in the Ottoman Empire, 1720-
1829,” International Journal of Middle East Studies, 29 (3), 403-25.
____________ ed. (2000), Consumption Studies and the History of the Ottoman Empire,
1550-1922: An Introduction. New York, NY: State University of New York.
Rappaport, Erika Diane (2004), Shopping for Pleasure: Women in the Making of London’s
West End, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.
Reekie, Gail (1993), Temptations: Sex, Selling, and the Department Store, Sydney: Allen and
Unwin.
Ritzer, George (2007), The Mcdonaldization of Society, Los Angeles, CA: Pine Forge.
Roche, Daniel (2000), A History of Everday Things: The Birth of Consumption in France,
1600-1800, Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
Rook, Dennis W. (1985), “The Ritual Dimension of Consumer Behavior,” Journal of
Consumer Research, 12 (December), 251-64.
Salzman, Ariel (2000), “The Age of Tulips: Confluence and Conflict in Early Modern
Consumer Culture (1550-1730),” in Consumption Studies and the History of the
Ottoman Empire, 1550-1922: An Introduction, ed. Donald Quataert, New York, NY:
State University of New York, 83-106.
Sandikci, Özlem and Güliz Ger (2010), “Veiling in Style: How Does a Stigmatized Practice
Become Fashionable?” Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (June), 15-36.
Schama, Simon (1987), The Embarrassment of Riches, New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
Schievelbusch, Wolfgang (2000), Keyif Verici Maddelerin Tarihi: Cennet, Tat ve Mantık,
Ankara: Dost.
Schroeder, Jonathan E. (2006), “Critical Visual Analysis,” in Handbook of Qualitative
Research Methods in Marketing, ed. Russell W. Belk, Northampton, MA: Edward
Elgar, 303-21.
Schweigger, Salomon (2004), Sultanlar Kentine Yolculuk: 1578-1582, İstanbul: Kitap.
Simmel, Georg (1957), “Fashion,” The American Journal of Sociology, 62 (May), 541-58.
Slater, Don (1997), Consumer Culture and Modernity, Cambridge: Polity.
Smith, Ruth Ann and David S. Lux (1993), “Historical Method in Consumer Research:
Developing Causal Explanations of Change,” Journal of Consumer Research, 19
(March), 595-610.
Stern, Barbara S. (1989), “Literary Criticism and Consumer Research: Overview and
Illustrative Analysis,” Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (December), 322-34.
Şeker, Mehmet (1997), Gelibolu’lu Mustafa ‘Âlî ve Meva ‘idü’n-nefais fi-kava ‘idi’l Mecalis,
Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu.
Taylor, Roderick (1993), Ottoman Embroidery, London: Studio Vista.
Tezcan, Hülya (2004), “Furs and Skins Owned by the Sultans,” in Ottoman Costumes: From
Textile to Identity, ed. Suraiya Faroqhi and Christoph K. Neumann, Istanbul: Eren, 63-
80.
Thévenot, Jean (1978), 1655-1656'da Türkiye, İstanbul: Tercüman.
Thompson, Craig J. (2004), “Marketplace Mythologies and Discourses of Power,” Journal of
Consumer Research, 31 (June), 162-80.
Thompson, Craig J. and Zeynep Arsel (2004), “The Starbucks Brandscape and Consumers'
(Anticorporate) Experiences of Glocalization,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31
(December), 631-42.
Thompson, Craig J. and Diana L. Haytko (1997), “Speaking of Fashion: Consumers’ Uses of
Fashion Discourses and the Appropriation of Countervailing Cultural Meanings,”
Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (June), 15-42.
Tiger, Lionel (2005), Pursuit of Pleasure, London: Transaction.
Tosh, John (2006), The Pursuit of History: Aims, Methods and New Directions in the Study of
Modern History, London: Pearson Education.
Trentmann, Frank (2006), “The Modern Genealogy of the Consumer: Meanings, Identities,
and Political Synapses,” in Consuming Cultures, Global Prespectives: Historical
Trajectories, Transnational Exchanges, ed. John Brewer and Frank Trentmann,
Oxford: Berg, 19-70.
Tucker, Kenneth H. (1993), “Aesthetics, Play and Cultural Memory: Giddens and Habermas
on the Postmodern Challenge,” Sociological Theory, 11 (2), 194-211.
Ülgener, F. Sabri (1981), İktisadi Çözülmenin Ahlak ve Zihniyet Dünyası, İstanbul: Der.
Ünver, Süheyl (1963), “Türkiye'de Kahve ve Kahvehaneler,” Türk Etnografya Dergisi, 5, 39-
83.
Urry, John (2000), Consuming Places, London: Routledge.
Veblen, Thorstein (1899/1994), The Theory of Leisure Class, New York, NY: Dover
Publications.
Venkatesh, Alladi (1995), “Ethnoconsumerism: A New Paradigm to Study Cultural and
Cross-Cultural Consumer Behavior,” in Marketing in a Multicultural World, ed. Janeen
A. Costa and Gary Bamossy, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 26-67.
Vickery, Amanda (1993), “Women and the World of Goods: A Lancashire Consumer and
Her Possessions, 1751-81,” in Consumption and the World of Goods, ed. John Brewer
and Roy Porter, New York, NY: Routledge, 274-304.
Walkowitz, Judith R. (1992), City of Dreadful Delight: Narratives of Sexual Danger in Late-
Victorian London, Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago.
Wang, Di (2000), “The Idle and the Busy: Teahouses and Public Life in Early Twentieth
Century Chengdu,” Journal of Urban History, 26 (May), 411-437.
Weinberg, Alan Bennett and Bonnie K. Bealer (2002), The World of Caffeine: The Science
and Culture of the World's Most Popular Drug, New York, NY: Routledge.
Wills, John E. Jr., (1993), “European Consumption and Asia Production in the Seventeenth
and Eighteenth Centuries” in Consumption and the World of Goods, ed. John Brewer
and Roy Porter, London: Routledge, 133-47.
Yazıcı, Tahsin (2009), “Qalandariyya,” in Encyclopaedia of Islam, ed. Peri Bearman, Thierry
Bianquis, Clifford Edmund Bosworth, Emeri van Donzel and Wolfhart P. Heinrichs,
Brill Online, http://www.brillonline.nl/subscriber/entry?entry=islam_COM-0422.
Zilfi, Madeline C. (2004), “Whose Laws? Gendering the Ottoman Sumptuary Regime,” in
Ottoman Costumes: From Textile to Identity, ed. Suraiya Faroqhi and Christoph K.
Neumann, Istanbul: Eren, 125-41.
Table 1: Types of Data Sources

Name Definition Authorship Purpose of usage

Ottoman Scholarly • Contemporary • The Ottoman context
historiography research on historians • Raw data and expert analysis of
history poetry and other data
Interviews With • Halil İnalcık • Locating data on consumer culture
Ottoman • Mehmet Kalpaklı and coffeehouses
historians • Suggestions and feedback on data
analysis
Fatwas Opinion of • Ebussuud Efendi • Discourses on the coffeehouse
religious • Bostanzade • Changes in the norms
authority
Decrees Sultan’s • Discourses on the coffeehouse
order • Practices of the state, consumers,
and coffeehouse owners
Poems and Tezkire is • Anonymous • Discourses on the coffeehouse
tezkires similar to a • Various authors • Descriptions of coffeehouse
poetry • Tezkire: Aşık objects, design, service, and
anthology Çelebi (a judge) experiences
• Cultural production according to
social classes
Festival Accounts of • Intizami (unknown • The coffeehouse context, events,
Books festivals biography) activities, consumer experiences
held by the • Gelibolu’lu and reactions
palace. Mustafa Âlî • Relations among consumers from
(bureaucrat) different social classes
Chronicles Accounts of • Peçevi Efendi • Economic, social, and political
historical • Katip Çelebi changes
events. • Koçu Bey • History of the coffeehouses
Book on Account of • Kınalızade Ali • Appropriate ways of consumption
morality Orthodox Efendi (scholar) • Norms
Islamic
morality.
Etiquette Depictions • Anonymous • Everyday life and appropriate
Books of manners. • Gelibolu’lu manners
Mustafa Âlî • Deviances from the norms
• Consumption experiences
Travelers’ Notes and • Schweigger • Outsider’s view on Ottoman culture
notes letters of • Thévenot and everyday life
Europeans • And others
Price Book Price lists • Issued by the state • Types, qualities and prices of goods
for goods in the market
Miniatures, Visual Miniatures: • Depiction of coffeehouse objects,
engravings, depictions Ottomans. design, service, and experiences
drawings Engravings and • Comparison with insider’s views
drawings: by
European travelers
FIGURE 1
MINIATURE DEPICTING A LATE 16TH CENTURY OTTOMAN COFFEEHOUSE
Note.—Produced by an anonymous artist. Published in And (2004, 383).
FIGURE 1
MINIATURE DEPICTING A LATE 16TH CENTURY OTTOMAN COFFEEHOUSE
Note.—Produced by an anonymous artist. Published in And (2004, 383).
1- METHOD
1- OTTOMAN CONSUMER CULTURE: 16th and 17th CENTURIES
2- The Class Structure and Sumptuary Laws
2- Increase in Possessions, Purchases, and in the Interest in Comfort
2- Widespread Consumption of Fashion, Luxury, and Leisure Time Pleasures

2- Interactions with Other Early Modern Consumer Cultures
1- OTTOMAN COFFEEHOUSE CULTURE IN THE 16TH AND 17TH CENTURIES
2- Coffeehouse as a “Fourth Place”
2- Ottoman Coffeehouses: Revisiting the Formation of the Public Sphere
1- MULTIPLE DISCOURSES
2- Pleasure Discourse
2- Orthodox Islam on Coffee Consumption
2- Sufi Islam on Coffee Consumption
2- Health Discourse
1- RESISTANCE AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COFFEEHOUSE CULTURE
AND THE CONSUMER
2- Tactics of Resistance
3- Transgressive Tactic: Leisure as Escape.
3- A Less Transgressive Tactic: Leisure for the Sake of Poetry.
3- The Least Transgressive Tactic: Limiting Leisure.
2- Normalization of the Consuming Subject and Legalization of the Coffeehouse
3- Extensive Resistance across Roles and Classes and Constructing Self-ethics.
3- Institutional Resistance and the Transformation in the State and the Religious Institution.
1- DISCUSSION
2- Implications for the Literature on Ottoman History
2- Reflections on Consumer Resistance
2- Reflections on Understandings of Consumer Culture the “Consumer”
1- REFERENCES

Early Modern Ottoman Coffeehouse Culture and The Formation of The Consumer Subject

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Early Modern Ottoman Coffeehouse Culture and The Formation of The Consumer Subject

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Copyright Journal of Consumer Research 2010 1

Preprint (not copyedited or formatted)

Early Modern Ottoman Coffeehouse Culture and the

Eminegül Karababa (e.karababa@exeter.ac.uk) is lecturer in marketing, University of Exeter,

Scholars have linked the historical development of consumer culture to tendencies

OTTOMAN CONSUMER CULTURE: 16th and 17th CENTURIES

The Class Structure and Sumptuary Laws

Increase in Possessions, Purchases, and in the Interest in Comfort

Widespread Consumption of Fashion, Luxury, and Leisure Time Pleasures

Seventeenth century saw the sudden appearance of novel styles of clothing—such as

Interactions with Other Early Modern Consumer Cultures

OTTOMAN COFFEEHOUSE CULTURE IN THE 16TH AND 17TH CENTURIES

Coffeehouse as a “Fourth Place”

coffeehouses without facing discrimination based on occupation, religion, or status.

Ottoman Coffeehouses: Revisiting the Formation of the Public Sphere

The multiparty negotiations among four discourses—pleasure, Orthodox Islam, Sufi

As we have seen, Ottoman coffeehouses were sites of a variety of leisurely pleasures.

Its style is appropriate, its art is unique

Search, but it will not be possible to find anything like that

History, which is watching helplessly, said that

Orthodox Islam on Coffee Consumption

market to the consumption by the ideal Ottoman Muslim—the sultan’s subject—and

Sufi Islam on Coffee Consumption

Sufism is an ascetic-mystical trend in Islam characterized by distinct values, practices,

Constipation and dryness is its continuing nature

Oh prodigal! Don’t talk pretentiously about science that coffee is dry

Another poet, Nev’i focused on the beneficial, stimulating, and productivity-enhancing

Cannot lecture the next day, cannot read books at nights

RESISTANCE AND THE

Normalization of the Consuming Subject and Legalization of the Coffeehouse

Does it [coffee] have a match or an equivalent in attracting customers?

….That world seducer took the place of wine.

Has a desire for money, wanders around, coinizes [becoming coin]

Our cultural-historical analysis contributes to a less studied area of consumer culture

Repeated and proliferated, the once-transgressive coffeehouse consumption practices became

Implications for the Literature on Ottoman History

Reflections on Consumer Resistance

Contemporary consumer research constructs a resisting and self-defining subject, who

Reflections on Understandings of Consumer Culture and the “Consumer”

Giesler, Markus (2008), “Conflict and Compromise: Drama in Marketplace Evolution,”

Jenks, Chris (2003), Transgression, London: Routledge.

Table 1: Types of Data Sources

Name Definition Authorship Purpose of usage

Note.—Produced by an anonymous artist. Published in And (2004, 383).

MINIATURE DEPICTING A LATE 16TH CENTURY OTTOMAN COFFEEHOUSE

Note.—Produced by an anonymous artist. Published in And (2004, 383).

2- Widespread Consumption of Fashion, Luxury, and Leisure Time Pleasures

Anda mungkin juga menyukai